Shotcall GG is an independent competitive gaming and esports site, and every number, tier placement and result we publish should be traceable to where it came from. This page explains which sources we trust, how we build and date tier lists, how we check results, and what happens when we get something wrong.
Where our numbers come from
We rank sources by how close they are to the original fact. The closer to the source, the more weight it carries.
| Priority | Source type | What we use it for |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Official developer and publisher channels | Patch notes, balance changes, ranked rules, season dates, official rank distributions |
| 2 | Tournament organisers and official league channels | Match results, brackets, rosters, prize pools, rulings and penalties |
| 3 | Reputable esports data providers | Match statistics, historical records, player and team stats |
| 4 | Community wikis, stat trackers and datamines | Leads to verify, context, and clearly labelled samples |
If a lower-priority source conflicts with a higher one, the higher one wins. If a developer and a third-party tracker disagree on what a patch changed, we go with the patch notes and say so.
Patch notes come first
Balance analysis on Shotcall GG starts with the official patch notes. We read the full notes, including bug fixes and small adjustments buried at the bottom, because those often matter as much as the headline changes.
Developers sometimes ship changes that never appear in the notes, or fix them later in a hotfix. When players spot an undocumented change, we treat it as unconfirmed until the developer acknowledges it or we can reproduce it ourselves. We state which of those it is.
Rank distributions
We only publish a rank distribution as official when the developer has released it. Some studios publish these figures regularly, some do it occasionally, and some never do.
When no official figure exists, we will not invent one or present an estimate as fact. If we reference third-party tracker data, we label it as a sample and explain its limits. Trackers typically only see players who have used or linked their service, which tends to skew toward more engaged, higher-ranked players. That makes the numbers useful for spotting trends and unreliable as a picture of the whole player base.
Every distribution we show carries the season or date it applies to. Rank systems get reworked often, and a distribution from two seasons ago can be badly misleading.
How we build tier lists
A tier list is an opinion backed by evidence. Ours combine four inputs:
- The patch itself. What changed, what got stronger, what got weaker, and what new interactions the changes create.
- Official and published data. Win rates, pick rates and ban rates from the developer where available, or from reputable data sources, with sample size taken into account. A high win rate on a tiny number of games carries little weight.
- Professional play. What teams pick and ban in official competition. We treat pro picks carefully, because coordinated five-player teams value different things than solo queue.
- Hands-on testing. Our own time in the game on the current patch, checking whether the numbers match how something actually plays.
When these inputs disagree, we explain why we sided with one over another rather than hiding the tension.
Every tier list is dated to a patch
Each tier list shows the patch number it was built for and the date it was last reviewed, near the top of the page. A tier list without a patch number is close to worthless, because one balance update can turn a top pick into a liability.
After each major patch, we review our tier lists for that game. If the changes are significant, we rebuild the list. If they are minor, we update the affected entries and refresh the review date. Hotfixes that shift balance trigger a review too.
If a list has not yet been updated for the newest patch, we say so plainly rather than letting an old list pass as current.
Context matters
Where it makes a real difference, we separate recommendations by context, such as solo queue versus organised play, or lower ranks versus higher ranks. Something that dominates in coordinated play can be difficult to use well in random matchmaking, and the reverse is common too.
How we check results
Match results, standings and brackets are confirmed against the tournament organiser or the official league channel. Where the organiser’s record is slow to update, we cross-check with a reputable esports data provider and update once the official record catches up.
A few rules we follow:
- Live results are provisional. During an event, results can be marked as provisional until confirmed.
- Rulings override scorelines. Forfeits, disqualifications, technical replays and penalties can change an outcome after the fact. We follow the organiser’s final decision and note the change.
- Rosters need confirmation. We report roster moves as confirmed only when the team, player or organiser has announced them. Reports from established esports journalists are credited and described as reports until confirmed.
Leaks, rumours and datamines
Unannounced changes, characters and roster moves show up in leaks and datamines all the time. When we cover them, we tell you how reliable the source is: official, an established reporter with a proven record, a community datamine, or an anonymous account with a mixed or unknown record. Our wording matches that grade.
We report on what leaks claim. We do not host, embed or point readers to leaked files, builds or footage, and we never try to identify anonymous leakers.
Why we never give betting tips
Shotcall GG does not publish betting picks, predictions framed as wagering advice, odds recommendations or links to betting operators. This is a fixed policy.
Our reasons are straightforward:
- Our analysis is not built for it. A tier list or match preview explains how a game is played and who looks strong. Treating that as a reason to put money on an outcome misuses it.
- Esports has a real integrity problem with betting. Match-fixing cases have damaged several scenes, and we do not want to add pressure in that direction.
- Much of the audience is young. Competitive gaming draws many readers who are too young to gamble legally, and we write with that in mind.
- Independence. Taking money from betting operators would create an incentive to push wagering, and readers would be right to question our coverage as a result.
Match previews on Shotcall GG may discuss form, matchups and which team looks favoured. That is analysis, and it is not a recommendation to bet.
Independence
Shotcall GG is a new, independent site. Developers, publishers, teams and tournament organisers do not pay for coverage or for placement in tier lists, and they do not review our work before it is published. If we ever receive something that could affect how readers see our coverage, such as early access or a review copy, we will disclose it in the relevant piece.
Corrections
We get things wrong sometimes. When we do, we fix it openly.
- Factual errors (a wrong result, an incorrect stat, a misreported patch change) are corrected promptly, and the page gets a short correction note explaining what changed and when.
- Updates that reflect new information, such as a new patch or a later ruling, are marked as updates with a date, so it is clear the original was accurate at the time.
- Minor fixes like typos or formatting are made without a note, as long as they do not change the meaning.
We do not quietly rewrite a piece to hide a mistake. If you spot an error, contact us through the details listed on the site, and include the page and what you believe is wrong. Every report is read, and if the source checks out, the page gets fixed.
Changes to this page
As Shotcall GG grows and covers more games, our methods will develop. When we change how we source, test or rank anything in a meaningful way, we will update this page to reflect it.