Winning percentages

[Seriq]

I would guess that Nomads are low because at the end of the day, you're foregoing a bazillion points in completed rows, which should ideally net you about... idk, 60 points? throughout the game.

[DHMS]

Only saw this now. Thanks for putting in the work and getting us those stats!

This confirms how absolutely insane Alchemist are, and we really need to get an option to ban them (or another balance update...). An 80% winrate is unheard of, and even 90% among expert players is just one of the most unbalanced things I've ever seen in any game...

As for Nomads, I'm not surprised. I've always thought they're terrible in 2 (or 3) player games, because they're the only civ that just cannot get a complete capital, unless they completely ignored their own CIV abilities. Even of Craftsmen, you can devote half of the income buildings to your civ mat and then still get an (almost) complete capital with ~7 landmarks (6 from leading 2 tracks, 1 extra from tech cards). Doing the same on Nomads would mean you only get like 7 ot 8 resources from your civ ability. Also, if your only strength is getting a lot of resources early only, that means you benefit from first to era bonuses more rarely than other civs. Nomads are a decent choice in a 4 or 5 player game though, as can ignore landmarks more than anyone else, and have a bigger map to spread on.

[Lordnine]

I would also love an option to ban the Alchemist. I don’t understand how they were approved in the first place since they essentially have the Leaders ability plus get bonus extras on top of it.

[Demonocrat]

I would also love an option to ban the Alchemist. I don’t understand how they were approved in the first place since they essentially have the Leaders ability plus get bonus extras on top of it.

I think the argument was that their power is compensated by their unpredictability, but in my experience that isn't the case at all. They get so many rerolls that they're very unlikely to low-roll and can fish for their favorite advance + a resource generating benefit.

Even the worst case scenario for Achemists sounds playable if uninspiring : 8-10 points + a free resource (or equivalent). each income turn would make them below average but not even bottom tier. It feels like they should be high risk, high reward, but as is, they're essentially a zero risk civ.

The Alchemists should get the axe OR be reworked so that they either keep a single benefit from their three dice rolls (lowering their ceiling) OR do not get to reroll at all (making them actually unreliable but keeping their potential for high rolls).

[Andy_P]

Truly shocking to see Nomads that low. They are a very tactically flexible civ, but I suspect many people miss that and just go E+M. Nomads can effectively play any track combo. Should be mid tier imo.

Other surprises:
- How are Merrymakers not in the top 10 for games with expert players???
- Mystics are way higher than I would have guessed.
- Infiltrators higher than I would have guessed.

Im glad to see Inventors in the bottom half of civs. Imo they have been the most overrated civ among 400+ elo players for quite a while. Trash civ, but you get the odd game here and there with an early radio that gives people a warped view of how good they are on average.

I think most people start the Merry makers wrong. I think they should always start where you get 2 resources when you take income 2, and then when you take income 3 you explore/conquer to get two more, then you get two resources for income 4, and finally on income 5 you get capital city and either a conquer (points) or explore (points) or possibly tech card (points). I see too many people that set it up to get conquer on income 2.

I really love the new Mysitcs. Being able to get the extra income buildings out, and knowing what tap cards you have to work with is very helpful!

I also like the ability to choose between 3 civs with infilitrators. And getting a second civ ar the start of income 3 is really useful.

[Andy_P]

I would also love an option to ban the Alchemist. I don’t understand how they were approved in the first place since they essentially have the Leaders ability plus get bonus extras on top of it.

I cannot agree with this post enough! The new alchemists are great to give to a newbie player or a child, but to allow it in competitive play is definitely an unfair advantage. (That being said, I will pick Alchemists every chance I get - but would love an option to remove it from the game like marriage of state and Renaissance)

[Andy_P]

I was curious how good the new Alchemists are, and checked how often they win in duels.
A lot!! 71% of the time. Big jump from the winning percentages of other Civ's. Next best are Tinkerers with 59%
Riverfolk are neither popular nor successful....
Traders are less likely picked than any other Civ, but have a better winning percentages than 5 other civs.
The table below is for 2 player games this year with any configuration or player strength. Maybe the distribution is different for Strong and above players
Not sure if the link to the image of the table works. Difficult to make a nicely formatted post. Let me know if you cannot see the image or if it comes with weird ads. I am using "snipboard.io".

Any idea what the winning percentage is for the starting player in a two person game? I think starting play definitely has an edge, but I have not looked at numbers.

(Also, what is the winning percentage of the player with the desert combo capital city? I know you can fill it out (my favorite is with Tech and Military, but several other combos work, but it is nowhere near as good as say Forrest - in my opinion. I don't know the actual winning percentages based on capital city, but for two player games desert is at a disadvantage.)

[NaCl_duke]

Starting player is not listed on the game summary page. One would need to "replay" all the games to see that. I am curious too, but I spent already too much time on this and the high score tracking
As for starting map win percentage and number of times selected (2 player games with arena settings, but not just arena, no filter for player level). No surprise that mountain is trailing