This article was originally published on GameSpot's sister site onGamers.com, which was dedicated to esports coverage.

　　The IEM World Championship provided an opportunity to see and analyze international competition and clashing regional play styles. The goal of this article is to look at the average gold leads and deficits for each team at various game times (at 10, 20, 30 minutes) and to draw conclusions about team and regional characteristics and strengths.

　　Looking at average gold leads/deficits illustrates how well a team is either outperforming an opponent or how well a team is denying an opponent from resources. Some teams start out well, consistently earning gold leads at 10 minutes, yet falter at later points in the game due to a variety of reasons. Whereas other teams start slowly, yet make strong rotations and good mid-game shot calls to pull ahead of their opponents.

　　Keep in mind that the IEM WC had only a few (in some cases only one) teams from each region, and there were a limited number of games played. Thus, the conclusions about a team’s or a region’s strength are not entirely perfect.

Early-Game: Gold Lead/Deficit at 10 Minutes

　　As you can see, KTB had the largest average gold lead at 10 minutes, while Gambit and Millenium had the largest gold deficits. The Korean and Chinese teams start out strongest in the first 10 minutes, with those three teams being three of the top four in this statistic. One potential takeaway from this graph could be that Korean and Chinese teams are strongest at early-game laning, objective control, and ganking. Seeing two out of the three European teams at the bottom of this statistics is not surprising given that the European teams tend to play passively in the early stages of the game and tend to play more-drawn-out games on average.

Mid-Game: Gold Lead/Deficit at 20 Minutes

　　As you can see, iG, KTB, and C9 average the highest average gold leads at 20 minutes. These teams excel at mid-game shot calling and rotations. Given that iG and KTB were also among the highest for the statistic at 10 minutes, it is fairly safe to say that these teams excel at early-game laning as well as mid-game decision making and rotations. Two of the three European teams average large gold deficits at 20 minutes, which could be considered typical of the characteristically longer and more passive play style.

　　It is also important to look at the relative gain/loss for each team from 10 minutes to 20 minutes. A team might average a small deficit at 10 minutes, but might perform best in the 10-20 minute range to average a small gold lead. Here are the relative gains/losses from 10 to 20 minutes:

　　Many people consider C9’s laning phase (on average) to be its weakness. C9 averages a small gold deficit at 10 minutes as seen from the first graph. Yet, as you can see from this graph, C9 is the strongest performing team (relative to its opponent) from 10 to 20 minutes. C9’s strength seems to be its mid-game decision making, team fighting, and objective control – all of which are in-line with popular opinion. Supporting the popular notions about the team’s strengths/weaknesses with results from international competition is fulfilling.

　　IG seems to be a team that also excels in this area. Many people consider Chinese teams to be “aggressive” and to be strong performers in the early- and mid-games. The results for this statistic help to support that notion. It is worth noting that KTB not only gets out to the largest gold lead at 10 minutes, but also steadily increases the gold lead from 10 to 20 minutes.

Mid-to-Late Game: Gold Lead/Deficit at 30 Minutes

　　Not every game lasted 30 minutes, so the sample size for this statistics is smaller. Also, game time affects the relative gold lead, as a 500 gold lead at 5 minutes is a larger percentage than the same gold lead at 30 minutes. WE did not play in any games that lasted 30 minutes, so there is no data for the team for this statistic.

　　As you can see from this graph, KTB, IG, and FNC earned the highest average gold leads at 30 minutes. A characteristic of a great team is to excel in all phases of the game. It is evident that KTB, and perhaps Korean teams in general, are strongest in terms of getting out to early gold leads and, essentially, not throwing.

　　TPA averaged a slight gold deficit at 20 minutes, yet TPA averaged the largest gold deficit, by far, at 30 minutes. TPA typically averages relatively short games in the GPL. Perhaps TPA has the least amount of experience in games of this length and is relatively unpracticed when it comes to mid-to-late game shot calling and decision making. It might be fair to conclude that Southeast Asian teams in general have the most room to improve when it comes to late game shot calling, team fighting, and decision making.

　　It is also worth looking at the relative gain/loss from 20 to 30 minutes to see how a team excels/lacks in this phase. Here are the results:

　　As you can see from the graph, IG, C9, and TPA performed poorly (relative to their opponents) in the 20-30 minute range. This could mean that these teams, and perhaps the regions in general, are relatively weakest when it comes to the late-game shot calling and execution. The three European teams are among the highest performing teams in the 20-30 minute range (relative to their opponents). Given that European teams have the longest average game time, they are undoubtedly experienced and proficient in the mid-to-late game skills. KTB, and perhaps most strong Korean teams in general, excels in this time frame.

Overall Team/Regional Conclusions

　　There are a few noticeable takeaways from the results. For example, NA’s strongest phase was the 10-20 minute phase, whereas the same time period was the weakest for the EU region. Korea was consistent throughout, as the region steadily increase its gold leads over time. Southeast Asia performed decently in the first two phases, yet fall off hard in the late game. The Chinese teams performed well in the first two phases, yet their opponents were able to diminish their gold deficits in the 20-30 minute range.

　　One could characterize the NA, SEA, and CHN regions as being regions that get ahead or are strong in the first 20 minutes, but lack the ability to close out games. Europe, on the other hand, falls behind early but uses a variety of means to claw back into games. Korea obviously earns a slight early gold lead, stretches the gold lead over time, and has the ability to close out games.

　　After looking at all of the graphs, there were a few results that either stuck out or helped to solidify preconceived notions about teams and/or regions in general.

　　Korea: KTB, and possibly Korean teams in general, are strongest overall and are consistently above average throughout all phases of the game.

　　China: Chinese teams performed among the strongest in the early game. Many people consider this to be typical of the Chinese play style, and it is neat to see the play style and characteristic manifest itself in international competition. The Chinese teams faltered in the mid-to-late game. This could mean that a regional weakness is decision making and rotations during this time frame.

　　Southeast Asia: TPA performed relatively average in the first two phases of the game, yet fell behind quite a bit by the 30 minute mark. TPA, and SEA in general play relatively shorter games, so the team and perhaps the region in general is weakest when it comes to late-game decision making and execution.

　　Europe: The European teams, in general, averaged small gold deficits at 10 minutes and at 20 minutes. FNC performed best of the three EU teams in these areas, and thus it is no surprise that they placed highest in the tournament of the three. The EU LCS averages long game times, and seeing the EU teams perform strongest in the 20-30 minute range helps to support the notion that EU teams are strong in the late game. GMB, MIL, and FNC have a lot of experience in making late-game objective calls, establishing vision, and fighting in team fights. The EU region could be among the best in the world in this phase of the game.

　　North America: C9 got out to a slight gold deficit at 10 minutes. C9 had weak early game laning, possibly typical of NA teams in general. Yet, C9 gained the most (relative to its opponent) in the 10-20 minute range. C9’s strengths seem to be mid-game team play and rotations. These results help to support the popular sentiments about the strengths and weakness of the team in general. C9 was the third worst performing team in the 20 to 30 minute phase. Game times in the NA LCS are relatively shorter. Perhaps C9 and NA teams in general are relatively inexperienced in this time frame and are lacking in the late-game decision making and team coordination required to excel against the best teams in the world.

　　Data collected by the onGamers Stats team: Derek 'Kathix' Adams, Steven 'whedgehead' Falgout, Kent 'Traepoint' Fraiser, Jake Morales, and James 'PelkaSupaFresh' Pelkey.

　　Image credit: IEM