Rewrite: GosuGamers Article - European Doto Best Doto?
(The following is an editing job of an article from GosuGamers, for a contributor application. The original article can be found here: http://www.gosugamers.net/dota2/features/3358-stats-analysis-european-doto-best-doto
Graphs are used heavily in the article, so seeing only the text may not make sense.
Original Text - Commentary - Edited Text)
With TI3 just a few days away, take a final look at what EU teams have in their repertoires and what they will most likely bring to the table. The article is written basing on the teams' drafts from the 4th of June till today.
Right off the bat, there are some pretty glaring issues with the copy.
- The usage of an abbreviation before it's being defined, which you should never do for clarity's sake, spell it out first, then abbreviate.
- The first sentence reads very awkwardly, they most likely "accidentally a word", but that doesn't make the mistake any better.
- Don't say repertoires. Speak plainly, you're not a French duke.
- The last sentence is just a mess. "The article", which article? "basing", based, "teams'", which teams? "4th of June", why is that date important? The first paragraph in any news article, needs to convey as much information about that article as possible. You're not being enticing by using vague language, you're just being confusing. Who. What. Where. When. Why. How.
With Dota 2's biggest tournament of the year, The International 3, just a few days away, it's important to take a closer look at the habits and preferences of those teams competing. For this article, we will be analyzing the drafts of the teams from Europe, looking back as far as June 4th when the 6.78 patch was first implemented.
With this nut graf, you tell the who (EU teams), you tell the why and the where (TI3), you tell the what (draft analysis), and you tell the how and the when (looking at drafting records since 6.78). You've now given the reader enough information about the article in order to make the informed decision as to whether or not to read the article, without pissing them off...
We are six days away from The International 3 and we think it is good for the folks to know the competing teams a little better, not your emotion and love for the team but pure numbers. We pulled the drafts from their games from the 4th of June, the first day of 6.78 patch, until today and from there, we analyze team patterns and their tendency to run certain heroes.
- In the first sentence there is an inconsistent usage of the word "we". It's first used (as naturally assumed by the reader), to mean "we" as in the general public, which is a safe assumption to make. But then in the same sentence, it's used as "we" as in the staff/representatives of GosuGamers. Keep it as one or the other, otherwise the reader will think GosuGamers' is thinking for the general public, or they have their own private International 3 that's also six days away.
- Don't say "folks", no one says "folks", much less "the folks".
- Just the whole last half of the first sentence is a mess, rewrite.
- Other than some awkwardness and tense issue, the last sentence is OK
- I also realized that I goofed, and this is actually the nut graf, while the paragraph before was some sort of dek. But screw it, we're doing it live.
Just use previous revised paragraph.
This article will be the first part of a five-series article highlighting team's playstyle.
- Seriously? It's not a five-series articles, that implies five completely separate sets. It's a five-part series, very distinct difference
This is the first article in a five-part series going over the drafting habits of the TI3 competitors.
As you can probably observe above, we are starting with European Dota today. Although they are located in Europe, the article does not include Quantic Gaming. They will be included in our fourth article, Wildcards.
- I know that everyone loves the multiple usage of Dota, but just speak plainly if you're writing a "professional"/non-blog article.
- You don't need to tell the reader to observe something in the article, they are reading the article, especially if it's something inane like a table of contents.
We'll begin our analysis on the European teams, and although Quantic Gaming are European, their analysis will not be included in this article. Instead we will cover the Wildcards Invitational match-up in a later article.
We also took enemy ban % against X team ban % to really highlight the sort of respect ban these teams were facing. The higher the number of difference in %, the higher these heroes got respect banned. High numbers also mean how scared the opponents are to go up against these heroes when facing a particular team.
- "Also" is not referring to anything, if it's a continuation of the last sentence/paragraph, it doesn't make sense.
- For the love of god, don't use symbols in place of words. It'S tHe EqVaLeNt Of DoInG tHiS. The reader can understand what you're saying, but for readability's sake, just don't do it.
- Anyone who's ever had to write a scientific abstract will want to slap this writer in the face for how poorly their "study's" methodology was explained.
While we'll be looking at which heroes a particular team picks the most, we'll also be looking at each team's top respect banned heroes. We'll do this by looking at how often a hero is banned against a particular team, and how often that same team bans that same hero themselves. Using the difference between those numbers, we can glean whether opposing teams are comfortable with that particular team having that particular hero in the hero pool.
Given their focus on getting early kills and winning teamfights, it's not a surprise to see Rubick (31.8%), Chen (31.8%), Dark Seer (30.3%), Puck (27.3%) and Gyrocopter (25.8%) on top of Na`Vi's picks, all of which are signature heroes of each member of the team. They can be very aggressive early on with Chen and Gyro, and at the same time secure enough AoE with Dark Seer and Puck to control teamfights. Other than that, we see Nyx Assassin, Alchemist (who has become first pick material ever since their trip to China), Lifestealer, Visage being picked quite a few times by the Ukrainian team. They are all about aggression, but sometimes can go for split-pushing with the Prophet as well.
- Using an undetermined "their", even if you define it later, is awkward for the reader. They don't know who they're reading about until later in the sentence. Reference the "who" first!
- Strictly speaking, and I'm guilty of it sometimes, but "teamfight" is not a word. Team fight is perfectly fine, but if you must, use team-fight, but that's probably just as awkward.
- "on top of Na'Vi's picks", is an awkward and unclear phrase, rewrite.
- It's not strictly necessary to place the percentages in the actual writing, especially if you're only pointing something already obvious, such as their top picks.
- Usage of parallel structure can make the second sentence flow better.
- Not saying "and" at the end of a list.
- Use full names of heroes if they haven't been referenced before, for clarity.
Given Na'Vi's focus on getting early kills and winning team fights, it's not a surprise to see Rubick, Chen, Dark Seer, Puck and Gyrocopter as their top five picks, all of which are signature heroes of each member of the team. They can be aggressive early on with Chen and Gyro, they have enough AoE with Dark Seer and they have control during team fights with Puck.
Other top picks include Nyx Assassin, Alchemist (who has become first pick material ever since their trip to China), Lifestealer and Visage. They are all about aggression, but they sometimes split-push with Nature's Prophet.
Surprisingly, it was not Dendi who received the most respect bans, but rather Puppey with his extraordinary Chen play. A 44% ban rate is a strong testament to what he is capable of doing with the hero.
- Use the proper research, it's not the 44% ban-rate that's noteworthy, it's the 42.5% ban-rate differential that's noteworthy.
- Some awkwardness in the phrasing of the first sentence.
Regarding who had the most respect bans, surprisingly enough it wasn't Dendi, it was Puppey, for his Chen play. A 42.5% ban rate differential is a strong testament to what he is capable of doing with the hero.
Despite their habit of picking unorthodox heroes here and there, Na`Vi usually stick with what they are comfortable with, always trying to get their hands on at least one or two signature heroes. The top 5 heroes were picked at least 25% or more, which made it easy to ban against NaVi. However, forcing team to commit one or two bans to take out the Chen or Rubick would mean leaving out heroes like Visage or Nyx Assasin which are also very dangerous.
- Again, identify the "their" first.
- "here and there" is necessary.
- The last sentence has problems. The syntax of the first part is incorrect, but it's easy to miss if you're not looking closely. And Visage or Nyx wouldn't be "left out", it'd be more accurate to say they're left in (the hero pool).
- Also, this is a nitpick, the 25% thing wouldn't make it "easy" for their opponents, merely "easier"
Despite Na'Vi's habit of picking unorthodox heroes, they usually stick with what they're comfortable with and always trying to get their hands on at least one or two of their signature heroes. Na'Vi's top 5 heroes had a pick percentage of at least 25%, which made it easier to ban against them. However, forcing teams to commit one or two bans to take out the Chen or Rubick would mean leaving heroes like Visage or Nyx Assasin in the hero pool, which is also very dangerous.
Looking at the picks, we can see that Alliance prioritized picking up AdmiralBulldog's signature heroes (Prophet, Lone Druid) the most, followed by support heroes that Akke is effective on (KotL, Visage, Chen). Alliance is known for picking a wide variety of carry heroes and that' why we only see 2 carries on the list in the name of Lifestealer (26.1%) and Gyrocopter (17%).
- Again, percentages aren't really necessary.
- The end of the last sentence is awkward, but can be easily fixed.
According to Alliance's pick percentages, they prioritize AdmiralBulldog's signature heroes (Nature's Prophet and Lone Druid) the most, followed by Akke's signature heroes (Keeper of the Light, Visage and Chen). Alliance is also known for picking a wide variety of carries, which is why there are only two in their top 10 picks, Lifestealer and Gyrocopter.
The Swedes love their Lone Druid, and opposing teams fear it. Even after the nerf to the Spirit Bear, AdmiralBulldog is still regarded as one of the best if not the best Lone Druid player at the moment, earning his signature hero an astonishing ban-rate of 60.3% while being picked up in 22.7% of their games. In fact, his brilliance on Prophet (banned 27.2% against) and Lone Druid as well as Akke's on Chen (banned 37.5% against) and Enchantress always force the other team to waste bans on those heroes, allowing s4 to pick up whatever solo mid and and carry that he and Loda desire.
- Why would the nerf to the bear affect AdmiralBulldog's ability to play Lone Druid? Need to fix the phrase of the second sentence!
- Never say "in fact", just say the facts.
- Also, no need to be gushy with players, this is an analysis article, not a fan page. Conversely, don't presume that a ban on a hero like Lone Druid or Chen against Alliance is a "waste". And don't speak in absolutes, unless they're actually the case. Be careful with language!
The Swedes love the Lone Druid, and opposing teams fear it. Even after the nerf to the Spirit Bear, AdmiralBulldog still earns his signature hero an astonishing ban-rate of 60.3%. His skill on Lone Druid and Nature's Prophet, as well as Akke's skill on Chen and Enchantress, forces the other team to respect ban often, allowing S4 to pick whatever heroes he wants.
Although Alliance is a rather predictable team in terms of drafting, their nearly perfect execution just put the opposing team in a position where they have to ban the same set of heroes every game and opens up space for either s4 or Bulldog to get their hands on their signature heroes. From then on, execution is their key to victory.
- Odd phrasings and more gushing. Ultimately, this paragraph can be deleted entirely, as the previous paragraph transitions well enough.
In contrast with the previous teams, Fnatic focused on securing themselves a strong carry for Era firsthand, picking up Lifestealer and Gyrocopter at a combined 60% rate. They also have a tendency of abandoning the off-lane, thus we only see Dark Seer and Enigma (who they often run as a support) up there. Fnatic is a team that is really hard to push into, as they often pick up supports like Naga Siren (26.3%) and KotL (22.5%) who can defend as well as split-push to no end.
- Usage of firsthand just wrong, it means "from the source". Simply "first" is correct.
- There is literally no point in giving combined percentages.
- We also don't need strategic insights if they're not relevant (Enigma)
- The last sentence feels like it's starting a completely new thought (paragraph), which can be fixed by rephrasing.
Unlike the previous teams, Fnatic focus on securing themselves a strong carry, with Lifestealer and Gyrocopter being their top picks. They also have a tendency of abandoning the off-lane, which would explain why we only see Dark Seer and Enigma in their top 10. Naga Siren and Keeper of the Light are also favorites of Fnatic, both heroes can defend as well as split-push, making them difficult to push into.
Over to the Ban table, Prophet and Lifestealer are banned the most against this team as Trixi and Era are beasts on those two heroes. Most notable, however, is the Disruptor ban. Fnatic uses the hero from time to time to set up devastating combos with Naga, Dark Seer and other Aoe heroes and as a result Disruptor earned himself a place among top heroes banned against Fnatic.
- "this team", just type the team.
- Aoe is not a word, AOE is though, technically.
- This paragraph is full of fluff and awkwardness. The whole mentioning of Disruptor is misinformation, or at least it's not really notable. Later in the article, Virtus Pro have Disruptor banned against them way more than Fnatic do. What's more notable is Jakiro's ban differential, a hero that doesn't show up in any other team's top 10 charts (at least in Europe.) Same goes for the Nature's Prophet ban differential in relation to how often the hero is picked for them.
Regarding the bans, one odd thing to note is Nature's Prophet's ban differential, the highest for Fnatic, in comparison to the hero's pick percentage. Which probably means teams are banning him often unnecessarily, or that Trixi doesn't play him as often as people think, but what's more likely is that teams just don't want to deal with a Prophet. Another oddity is Jakiro's ban rate differential. Like Prophet, he's not a top 10 pick for Fnatic. He also doesn't appear in any other team's charts, at least as far as the European teams go.
Unlike Alliance, Fnatic's difference in ban-rate compared to other teams is rather low, which means they have a flexible drafting style. They're a unique team, in which members can switch role around if they want to. Coupled with their smart choice of laning, Fnatic usually has the upper-hand and dominate their lanes right from the get-go. If not, they make up for it with their late game discipline and hope to turn the tides during crucial teamfights.
- It's a slippery slope to immediately assume the first thing when it comes to a study involving just numbers. The ban-rates may be more of an indication of how well-known a team's/player's signature heroes are, every know's AdmiralBulldog's hero is Lone Druid, but it's not the same for someone like Trixi. And regarding flexibility, for a team like Alliance, there's a difference in being flexible, and needing to be flexible. I'd argue that they are incredibly flexible, but if given the choice of their best heroes, why wouldn't they choose them?
- I don't like this whole paragraph, as it's full of generalities, and making loose claims off of the data, so I won't bother rewriting it.
A team that favors early skirmishes to create space for Black^, Mouz usually opted for aggressive mid heroes such as Puck, Beastmaster (for a combined 61.3%) and supports that can make early rotation like Rubick and Nyx Assassin (for a combined 62.1%). They spread their focus quite evenly accross all positions, which signifies their balance as a team. Although Nyx Assassin is no longer first-ban/pick material, it's still devastating if Mouz can get their hands on the spiked bug, earning him a 23.1% ban-rate.
- No referencing of vague terms, combined percentages, spelling mistakes, and just awkwardness.
- Again, the noteworthy thing about Nyx is not the ban rate, but his pick rate and ban differential.
Mousesports is a team that favors early skirmishes to create space for Black^, they opt for aggressive mid heroes like Puck and Beastmaster, and supports that can rotate early like Rubick and Nyx Assassin. And while Nyx is no longer first-ban/pick material, he is Mouz's third most picked hero, and has a fairly high ban rate differential.
Interestingly, Mouz is still fond of Shadow Demon (picked once every five-ish games), a strong support that somehow has fallen through the ranks as of late. Looking over to the Ban table, one might be suprised to see the Tinker on the list, being banned exclusively against the German squad. Mouz fans know they sometimes run the off-lane / jungling Tinker as a counter to split-pushing and add to their own split push power as well.
- Minor problems, typos, referencing, but otherwise fine.
- Also, given my revision of the last paragraph, I would make the beginning of this paragraph tie-in, but I won't bother.
Interestingly, Mouz is still fond of Shadow Demon as well, a strong support that has fallen through the ranks due to his nerf and the changing meta. It's also surprising to see Tinker on Mouz's list of top bans, but they sometimes run the off-lane/jungling Tinker as a counter to split-pushing, or to split-push themselves
It would be a mistake to not mention the playmaker plus the farming machine of Mouz: FATA- and Black^. FATA- got an impressive 35.8% ban-rate on his Puck, while the Anti-Mage is banned 26.3% of the time because of Black^'s farming skill. These two are the ones that often force certain bans from opposing teams and allow syndereN to have more choice on other positions.
- Needs to be less flowery, and words need to be cut.
FATA-'s Puck and Black^'s Anti-Mage have notably high ban rates and ban rate differentials, it's those respects bans by opposing teams that allow syndereN to have more pick choices on other positions.
A general look at VP's top picked heroes suggest a well-balanced mix of pushing, ganking and teamfighting. The Russian squad usually focus on wining and ending games during the mid-game, which lead them to pick heroes that shine the most during that phase of the game. Heroes who take control after the 10-15 minute mark like Prophet and Queen of Pain were picked for a combined 68% of their games, followed by the Outworld Devourer who can do wonders with an early Mek and BKB. Their most picked supports are all heroes that can transition very well from early roaming and ganking to pushing / teamfighting such as Vengeful Spirit (who, surprisingly, was picked up 21.8% of the time), Leshrac, Bane and Naga Siren.
- Early abbreviations, typos, grammatical errors, combined percentages, and truncated names. All minor problems, but I feel some rewrites are necessary to help improve flow.
Virtus Pro's top picked heroes suggest a well-balanced mix of pushing, ganking, and team fighting. The Russian squad favors heroes that can be aggressive in the mid-game, such as Nature's Prophet, Queen of Pain and Outworld Devourer. Similarly, their support roster consists of heroes that can transition from roaming to pushing/team fighting, such as Bane, Naga Siren, Leshrac, and, surprisingly, Vengeful Spirit.
Over to the Ban table, we see Naga Siren being banned against VP by opposing teams in 41.1% of their games. The Russian was one of the first teams to bring Naga back to the scene after her buff and has been quite successful with the hero. Another notable ban against VP is the Disruptor, who NS really likes picking up to combo with the Naga. For a support who is considered to be only situational, having a 32% ban-rate says a lot about VP's efficiency with this hero.
- "we see" is unnecessary.
- Believe it or not, I actually like this paragraph, my only issue is the constant use of the ban rates, and not the differentials.
Virtus Pro was one of the first teams to bring Naga Siren back into the current meta (with great effect), so seeing the hero as VP's top respect ban is not surprising. Another notable hero is Disruptor, who is branded as a situational pick, but is often respect banned against VP.
At this point, a sharp eyes would have noticed the lack of carries in both tables. This really is a testament to VP's aggressive drafting and playstyle, always looking to end the match early with strong utility, mid-game heroes as well as supports who can roam early. This mindset has built up a very entertaining team to watch, but sometimes it backfire and come back to bite them in the bottom for not having enough firepower to go late.
- The whole first half sentence is fluff, and can be removed for conciseness. The rest is just awkward.
One thing to note is the lack of carries in Virtus Pro's pick and ban table, which is a clear indication of their preference towards mid-game engagements and early aggression. This often makes for exciting games, but it also means that VP have a tough time if they can't end the game early.
