Statistics Tracking

Talk about anything regarding the Hidden Dimensions core game and HD Spectrum.
User avatar
PenneyRZ
Posts: 1391
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:57 pm

Statistics Tracking

Postby PenneyRZ » Tue Nov 01, 2011 9:17 pm

Anything being done in this regard to pull the info from the database and put it on a webpage somewhere?

We talked about it quite long ago and I just wanted to see if there was any progress on it.
PenneyRZ
User avatar
Greywing
Posts: 3086
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 5:47 pm
Contact:

Re: Statistics Tracking

Postby Greywing » Tue Nov 01, 2011 9:30 pm

No progress, i'll see about setting up a simple display page one of these days.
SVC - NULLL games.
Found a bug or have a question? PM me or post on the forum.
User avatar
Greywing
Posts: 3086
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 5:47 pm
Contact:

Re: Statistics Tracking

Postby Greywing » Thu Nov 03, 2011 11:52 am

Here are some stats.

HD pvp stats
9972 decks have been processed (5096 winners + 4876 losers)

Numbers per race that's most presents in winning decks and in losing deck

Code: Select all

HU   364 - 558
CA   400 - 443
XY   589 - 669
CC   833 - 563
RV   263 - 313
MT   773 - 553
TM   983 - 794
RD   632 - 677
AR   259 - 306

HU is not used a lot, and on top of that tends to lose way more games than it wins.
CA not used much, but win/loss rate is not too bad
XY average use, normal win/loss rate
CC used a lot and wins a lot
RV little use, win/loss rate a bit high
MT more usage due to the boost, wins plenty
TM most used, tends to win a lot
RD average use, normal win/loss rate

top 10 most used cards

Code: Select all

Ghost Ship            10936
Data Crystal         7428
Spark               7293
Relic Fighter         6970
Grand Technolith      6695
Lost Mine            6052
Techno Demon         5806
Greater Techno Demon   5585
Unstable Capacitor      5152
Prismatic Crystal      5058


top 10 most used cards in decks that lost

Code: Select all

Ghost Ship            4467
Relic Fighter         3526
Spark               3503
Data Crystal         3288
Lost Mine            2951
Grand Technolith      2879
Techno Demon         2357
Elemental Rift         2349
Greater Techno Demon   2312
Prismatic Crystal      2174


top 10 most used cards in decks that won

Code: Select all

Ghost Ship            6469
Data Crystal         4140
Grand Technolith      3816
Spark               3790
Techno Demon         3449
Relic Fighter         3444
Greater Techno Demon   3273
Unstable Capacitor      3222
Lost Mine            3101
Prismatic Crystal      2884


Clearly the Ghost ship needed a nerf. It's basically two decks that dominate these stats : Draw denial (changes in progress) and CC rush (changes to ghost ship and unstable cap should influence this)
SVC - NULLL games.
Found a bug or have a question? PM me or post on the forum.
User avatar
Freefall
Posts: 248
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2011 5:40 pm

Re: Statistics Tracking

Postby Freefall » Thu Nov 03, 2011 12:24 pm

some of those stats could have something to do with the type of player drawn to a particular deck and the type of player/play-style that wins most.

The above is a huge factor in many games that is often overlooked...I, however, am too tired to elaborate now...and don't care enough to do so later.
:rv: FREEFALL :tm:
User avatar
PenneyRZ
Posts: 1391
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:57 pm

Re: Statistics Tracking

Postby PenneyRZ » Thu Nov 03, 2011 4:10 pm

Greywing wrote:HU 364 - 558
CA 400 - 443
XY 589 - 669
CC 833 - 563
RV 263 - 313
MT 773 - 553
TM 983 - 794
RD 632 - 677
AR 259 - 306[/code]


Ranked by win % when played
Pink - 59.67%
Purple - 58.30%
Teal - 55.32%
Gold - 48.28%
Green - 47.45%
Blue - 46.82%
Artifact - 45.84%
Brown - 45.66%
Red - 39.48%

Percent above or below nominal 50% win rate
Pink - 19.34% more
Purple - 16.59% more
Teal - 10.56% more
Gold - 3.44% less
Green - 5.10% less
Blue - 6.36% less
Artifact - 8.32% less
Brown - 8.68% less
Red - 21.04% less

It is interesting to note that no colors are over that are less than 10% over.

Also that Red is more than twice as far under than the next lowest color, almost 3 times as far under. Also that Red is the only color that is more than 10% under.

Red is clearly the underdog color here, but most of these games were played pre-denial protection. Since then the color has changed a lot, but I am not sure that will change the results any.

The colors ranked according to total usage percentage (Primary colors most used)
Teal = 17.82%
Pink = 14%
Purple = 13.3%
Gold = 13.13%
Blue = 12.62%
Red = 9.25%
Green = 8.45%
Brown = 5.78%

vs nominal 12.5% usage rate
Teal = 42.56% more
Pink = 11.99% more
Purple = 6.38% more
Gold = 5.01% more
Blue = 0.92% more
Red = 26.03% less
Green = 32.37% less
Brown = 53.79% less

There are only 3 colors that are even +/- 10% from an average usage rate, the rest are skewed far in one direction or another, most of the rest are skewed away on the low end.

The following is a hybrid index that combines how often it wins and how often it is played
Teal = 19.29
Pink = 16.35
Purple = 15.17
Gold = 12.4
Blue = 11.56
Green = 7.85
Red = 7.14
Brown = 5.16
Artifact = 5.08

What those numbers are isn't very important compared to the relationship between them. It is pretty clear to see that high win rate is usually rewarded by more plays. However, Blue, Green, and Red tend to break that mold. Blue and Red are played much more often than average according to how often they win and Green is not played nearly enough according to how much it wins.

Blue is played 50% more often than Green is, even though Green has a higher win rate. Red also has the 6th highest usage percent even though it has the 9th highest win rate (the worst).

A couple questions in my mind:
1) Why are people playing Red when the win rate is so low?
2) Why is blue preferable to green?

Looking back at the charts for what cards get used the most often, it appears that people are using blue because they feel it is necessary in order to have the defensive tools of Spark and Data Crystal. They probably feel that these tools are necessary in order to combat the extreme speed of the pink and purple decks, making Blue more of a metagame choice than a good choice in a vacuum. Note also that it doesn't even have a good success rate when using these tools. Blue decks as a whole haven't managed to crack a 50% win rate even with their early game defensive tools even though the field is littered with decks they would be theoretically good against.

Apparently, whatever is backing up those tools can't win the long games even if it manages to stall the fast decks.

Returning to my recent suggestion of adding a blue battery, I think part of the problem may be that blue is slower bringing its tools online than the opponent is slow in rebuilding. It could be that the blue battery would help blue come online more quickly after it has stalled out the opponent's offense with this, but I also want to say that this may be a symptom of a lack of good mid range options for blue (an area it is notoriously weak).

Blue wants to get out some lands as part of its strategy and that sets it back far enough in energy costs that it can't play the real threat ships (10+ costers) until it is too late. I would hazard a guess that the poor win rate has a lot to do with the anti-synergy between spending energy on lands that don't produce any and spending energy on assault class ships.

Blue seems to also want to have a solid threat in the 6 - 8 cost range that combines well with its lands. Something like a blue Alpha Destroyer, except instead of its damage the base ability it would instead have Regeneration 4 like Alpha Cruiser has. The 8/32 body would be pretty solid for beatdown and the regeneration plays well with any of its 3 lands. Sort of like a mini-Chryiax that it could actually get in play instead of having the real Chryiax sitting in the hand for a much longer time. Also minus the legendary.

Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing blue sacrifice some of the assault ship focus and focus more on the heavy ships in this way, using its lands and combat tricks from the Xyloxi's as a method to overcome the enemy's larger ships.

I don't really have time to go into Red and Green deeply enough right now, but I want to say that Red probably *appears* better than it really is and Green probably *appears* worse than it really is. Brown apparently both appears bad and actually is bad, though not nearly as bad as Red is.

I do intend to come back later and re-visit these colors when I have more time. Not so much to focus on how to make the colors good, but more to focus on the image people are receiving about how good these colors are. To some extent the proof is in the pudding, they aren't played because they don't win, but I think a lot of it also has to do with how *sexy* the colors appear to be as well. Red appears to be somewhat sexier than other colors that clearly win more. Something Red has makes people want to play it even if it is making them lose.

Greywing wrote:Single Card Stats

Clearly the Ghost ship needed a nerf. It's basically two decks that dominate these stats : Draw denial (changes in progress) and CC rush (changes to ghost ship and unstable cap should influence this)


For most decks, the only constraint to keep people from playing all their cards on turn 1 is energy cost. By adding life total as a second constraint, it became possible to play some cards dependent on the original constraint and some other cards completely independent of that constraint, or essentially to maximize playing according to two constraints instead of one.

At least we have now moved it such that it mostly falls under the original constraints so that both can't be independently maximized anymore. If any constraints are created in the future, they should be hybrid constraints like this card currently is in order to prevent things from devolving as they did in this case to a situation where you must play it only because everyone else does.
PenneyRZ
User avatar
Kuro
Posts: 645
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 10:21 pm
Location: France

Re: Statistics Tracking

Postby Kuro » Thu Nov 03, 2011 4:18 pm

Interesting info here.

It would probably be interesting to have separate sets of data for each major update. For example now, the game has evolved quite a lot since launch, and the more we change cards the less looking at the complete set of data will be meaningful.
User avatar
Greywing
Posts: 3086
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 5:47 pm
Contact:

Re: Statistics Tracking

Postby Greywing » Thu Nov 03, 2011 4:36 pm

This data is from 28 september to 29 oktober (approx 10000 entries)
From 29 oktober to now is about 725 entries.
SVC - NULLL games.
Found a bug or have a question? PM me or post on the forum.
User avatar
PenneyRZ
Posts: 1391
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:57 pm

Re: Statistics Tracking

Postby PenneyRZ » Thu Nov 03, 2011 7:50 pm

I wanted to revisit the previous issues, beginning with Red.

As I mentioned before, I think Red has some huge amount of sexiness that the over the board play can't really match up with.

A couple of reasons people could be playing it
1) It is the human team. It is easier to root for humans to win intergalactic combat instead of crystals or raw energy or stuff like that.
2) Hiraga is just plain badass. You lay it down and it dominates the field.
3) It uses a time-control sort of strategy, combining aggressive things like Nagatos with board control from things like Artillery Turret and Akata.

Some reasons not to play it
1) Red's Achilles Heel, its lack of cards that do something good and at the same time perform double duty healing its own base.
2) The fact that it just doesn't win very often
3) Hideous energy efficiency

Quickly expanding on those last reasons not to play it:
1) Blue, a color that gets played way more and wins way more plays kinda the same game Red does. Blue wants to put out lands and control the board, Red would like nothing more than to have 4x Artillery Turrets on the board ensuring that nothing the opponent ever laid out would last more than 1 turn. Hiraga does the same thing. The more ability that Red has to focus damage wherever it wants to, the more happy it is.

The major difference is that blue wants to control into large ships and red wants to control into small ones.

Additionally, every second card blue has heals its own base. Red has few to no cards that heal its own base that show up in decks. If Red wants to heal its own base, it can only do so by playing a card it doesn't need for some other reason. Artillery Turret is about the only base healing card that you will ever see in a Red deck and it is only a +5 healer. To go beyond that you have to take two color lands that are expensive and for which you probably don't want to ever get that color of energy anyway.

Blue, on the other hand, gives life total all over the place, helping to buy time till it gets its strategy online. Thunder Shard, Nebula Spire, any Xyloxi, Nebula Guard Tower, Crystal Tree.. All of those cards directly give life total. Spark and Data Crystal give effective life total as well. That is before things like Nebula Shard even have to be brought up.

If Red starts second against any aggressive deck, it will be tough to last long enough to bring its game plan online. Probably half of the bad results are Red playing against aggressive Pink and Purple decks where Red went second and never stood a chance. With less free life here and there for the base, Red is probably also the most punished color when it comes to playing things like Ghost Ship.

2) Symptom of a greater problem, not a real problem in and of itself.

3) Red is probably the color that is most dependent on having a huge flow of energy every turn. Blue has pretty stupid energy requirements too, but Red is worse. Blue likes to fill its land slots up with things like Nebula Spire that not only don't make energy, but instead actually use lots of it in the optimal case. At least with Nebula Spire if you let it sit there unclicked then it still gives you 3 life a turn, though.

A reasonable Red equivalent would be Akata which costs 2 more, still uses 2 energy a turn for its ability, but which is tremendously worse when unclicked than Nebula Spire is. A 4/30 isn't worth 4 energy unless you are going to click it a lot. Siege Cruiser brings more than twice the pain. Battle Cruiser is 7/27 with 1 click. Negator is 5/24 with regen 2 and 5 energy drain for an easier to pay 4. Devourer dominates the board much more than Akata does for an easier to pay 4. Mirror Shield costs 4 and beats pretty much anything across from it, pretty much single handedly destroying any hits-multiple strategy the opponent might employ.

Akata is probably the most energy inefficient thing Red has at it's disposal and it is also one of the most needed cards in the Red lineup due to its ability to heal other ships on the same side, pretty much all of which come with low life totals.

Red doesn't have nearly as much trouble as Blue does in terms of finding space to play energy generating structures, but there is still some competition there with Artillery Turrets and Red just can't get by on 4 a turn like Blue sometimes can. If Red isn't getting 7 or 8 a turn it pretty much can't sustain its game plan at all. One of the best lands for getting to that total, the Power Plant, also makes Red's Achilles Heel much much worse, costing 2 life a turn to keep the 2 energy generation going.

Which would you rather have, an Akata that costs 4 and needs 2 a turn to keep your ships alive, or a Thunder Shard that costs 4 and needs 0 a turn to keep your ships alive?

Vulture is even worse. It has the ability to shut down most any card, but only at a cost of 3 energy per turn. Three energy per turn is enough to cast your whole hand in a few turns. You throw that bad boy out early and all you have to look forward to that game is 30 turns of never having any spare energy laying around, especially when it is paired with Akatas.

The new Red battery can potentially address a lot of those issues, giving Red more energy generation every turn, but I doubt it will be enough to get red played single handedly.

Hiraga chips into that per turn generation too, and Artillery Turret takes up space that could be used for a 2 per turn generator as well.

Personally, I like the Red ability to use ships to control the field, I just think it is too overpriced.

I would like to see Vulture's ability cost 2 and Akata's ability cost 1. Maybe even going as far as making Tarogi heal 1 per turn on the team for free, that way you could Venom what is opposite of it (or Venom the Tarogi if it is a Mirror Shield) and have a potential healing of 7 per turn with 0 cost, freeing up the Red player's energy to do cool things like cast Hiragas.

The energy wouldn't be completely free flowing, but it would at least be free enough flowing in order to consistently implement its game plan before it is dead.

I mentioned in the patch thread that I would also like to see Solar Harvester trade abilities with Flare Spire and preferably go up to +12 on the HP as well.

Personally, I would like to see Solar Harvester as a 4 of in Red decks and that would be a potential padding of 48 more HP in life total. The +2 life healed on the team is good, but that is what Akata is for anyway. On the other hand, if you quit with the Solar Harvesters and play with 4x Flare Spires you gain a reasonable win condition, but you also lose the ability to use anti-denial in your deck. The anti-denial cards were meant to be used to counter denial and if you can't play them because you are playing Flare Spires for the HP instead, then denial is still free to go around making games unfun whenever it wants to.

Switching the abilities kills 2 birds with one stone. The Flare Spire would still be useful if you want that as a win condition (and it comes with a combat trick bonus) and Red has to use less deck space to cripple some of the best things against itself, leaving more room for things like Solar Citadel to cover the huge energy needs of the color.

So, in conclusion, I like how sexy Red is and how people play it even though it consistently loses, and I think that making a few minor switches on a couple cards here and there would greatly improve the over the board results the color experiences.

Akata - Change to 1 energy activation cost
Vulture - Change to 2 energy activation cost
Solar Harvester - CIP gains 12 life instead of CIP heal 2 on the team
Flare Spire - CIP heals 2 on the team instead of CIP gain 8 life
Tarogi - A nanobot carrier/greater nebula like heal for 1 on the team.

I wanted to make a particular note also that the Tarogi change would fit the pattern pretty well. 2 energy would buy you 1 heal per turn, 6 energy would buy you 2 heal per turn (+4 more), and 10 energy would buy you 3 heal per turn (another +4 more).

I will analyze Green soon'ish as well.
PenneyRZ
Rokossovski
Posts: 160
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 10:23 pm

Re: Statistics Tracking

Postby Rokossovski » Thu Nov 03, 2011 8:15 pm

I think Red's loss rate also has to do with the fact that many new players pick it - after all, they have no idea what the more exotic names are or can do. Being newbies, they tend to lose many games while learning the game.

On a side note, are these stats from PvP only?
User avatar
Greywing
Posts: 3086
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 5:47 pm
Contact:

Re: Statistics Tracking

Postby Greywing » Thu Nov 03, 2011 8:28 pm

These stats are from ranked pvp only.
It's probably true that new or impatient players will quickly select Human to get started, simply because it's first on the list. But then you'd expect there would be more games played in total with HU as well, right now only two races are played less in ranked pvp.

During the alpha i remember playing a number of games against red, 3-4 akatas on the field makes a wall that's hard to get through. Since release i don't really remember seeing many akatas in pvp at all (pvp tends to not give you the time to set up such a wall, and then maintain it).
Akata was designed to be the corner stone of any red deck. It has that potential and it seems to work well in pve.

Making it's ability cost 1 is a bigger boost than i would do, but there's not much else on the card that can be boosted to help its main role, so i'm willing to give this a shot.
Vulture was originally set with a high ability cost as i wanted to avoid situations where multiple such small ships could have too much control over the board. Even with 2 energy, 3 of them on the field will generally take up all your energy each turn. Again, worth trying.
Solar Harvester will get its HP bonus back. It was perhaps not the best idea to take it away while boosting so many other HP structures. As for the repair ability, for now i'm not going to put it anywhere else.
It would also be interesting to see how the repair all ability would work on such a small ship. It's probably not getting much play as it is now.
SVC - NULLL games.
Found a bug or have a question? PM me or post on the forum.
User avatar
PenneyRZ
Posts: 1391
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:57 pm

Re: Statistics Tracking

Postby PenneyRZ » Thu Nov 03, 2011 9:15 pm

Green is apparently the completely underrated color that everyone is missing.

It has a win rate better than Blue's win rate even though blue has Spark and Data Crystal which should both have quite a bit of usefulness against the top decks.

Green has no cards that are anywhere near as visibly good against the top decks (defined here as Pink Rush, Teal Control/Denial, and Purple Combo).

Green has a ton of back side power with their ships tending to take obscene amounts of damage in order to chomp through including Tarynn'Ixia which may be the hardest ship to kill in the game unaided. The carrier has a straight 50 on the back end and many of its low to mid cost ships like Freighter and Unstable Freighter have 40 on the back end too. Guardian only has 25 on the back end but it also absorbs 2 damage a turn per source AND comes with a free Fortify (half on each side).

Unlike Red, Green also has quite a lot of potential to heal its own base with cards that are useful for something else. The change to Anti-Matter Plant took some of that away, but that change is likely to be reversed soon. Dark Energy Tower gains 9 per land and is quite common in Green stacks.

Green isn't exactly a free energy color, but it has less qualms playing something like Crystalline Fusor purely for HP than Red does.

I really like Unstable Freighter's ability to go to the front for 13 apiece as well.

Still, it is hard to say how it is that Green is getting the over the board results that it does.

Thogrom Bomber is one of the color's best cards and it doesn't really do too well sitting across from Shimmering Ghost, Entropic Channeler, Devourer, or 6s that swing on turn 1. Moreso the latter than the former, but none of them you are likely to be really happy to see.

Green does have Anti-Matter Bombs, though, which are among the best cards in the game at 2 cheaper than the Lost Mines that are on the top 10 most used list. Exon'Exus also just got a fairly good upgrade recently that made it even harder for opponents to use things like Scanner Ghost against Green decks without the Green decks having to go the "I can't kill you" route with Plasma Screen and without having to cause energy bottlenecks with Railgun Turret early game.

That being said, it has an even more one dimensional game plan than Red has. Both colors want to put damage anywhere on the board and hit with big ships, but red can do things like reducing attack power, healing, disabling, etc, and green replaces all those board tricks with energy drain. Green's most useful low end ship is also by far the least resilient as well. Expect the bombers to get killed early and often if you play them (and dominate the game every time that doesn't happen).

I honestly have trouble coming up with make-able changes that would make the color a whole lot more glamorous and at the same time shore up its win rate. Mind you the win rate is quite close to the nominal 50% rate, but with only 3 colors breaking 50% average I don't mind helping the color out some if it can be done cheaply and easily.

What Green does have is one of the most useful actions in the game that don't say "Draw a card" on it, in Weaken. I would like to see that drop down to a cost of 1. As an action card it has pretty much no ability to become overpowered and it would both reinforce the color's own strengths at the same time as helping to shore up the color's major weaknesses (Bomber is so easy to kill and/or it takes a while to build up the energy to put out beastly ships).

I would also like to see something on the regular Freighter that would make people want to play green. Something that would get people to really want to play both Green and Freighter. Something that would do quite a lot to change the gameplay of green decks without doing something that is obviously not green.

People have been calling for a ship with a clicky energy drain ability lately, but I don't think that would really be good for the game. I just have this thing against abilities that the opponents find boring to play against, like energy drain. The Dark Energy Towers and Dark Rifts are more than good enough for that if the player really wants to attack from that angle.

What I would really like to see is either an ability that it could have happen automatically every turn OR an ability that could get tacked onto its clicky effect that would make that effect more powerful. A CIP ability would be least on my list of things to do for that ship.

One thought would be to have a random allied ship get +2 defense or a straight +1/+1 when its ability gets clicked in addition to the 2 energy or possibly to make the opposing ship. The ship opposing it could also get -2/-0 as well when the Freighter gets clicked. That would allow Green to use it as a blocker for something medium sized and further accelerate into a big ship in an open slot or at least put out the bigger ship down also opposing something as well.

With that last one, it would have enough toughness to get quite a few clicks in against most things, even Ultranaughts, and it would help ensure green won with whichever ship it replaces the Freighter with. It would also be much more able to actually win combats like that.

In any event, if I could wave the magic wand, the Freighter would give the ship opposite of it -2/-0 if there was one. That would give it the ability to go head to head with 3 cost pink ships with 6 power and win, albeit pretty slowly. It would also be powerful enough to do quite a bit to stop something like a Greater Techno as well out of the Denial Decks. 3x clicks would reduce its own defense by 12, but reduce the opposing attack by 6 which is pretty good. By that time the Freighter itself would have likely taken 6 + 4 + 2 (12) and make it a 3/16 likely facing something with 0 power. Doesn't sound too overly devastating.

Anyway, I think such a change might get people excited about green, unlike they are now.

Rok - Yes the stats are all from PVP.

- Edit -

I don't mind being more aggressive with the red abilities because red is designed to use ship abilities and it was always intended that ships like Vulture would have a place in the line up.

Making the abilities cheaper would make other colors have a much tougher time with red's board control than they do now, which is to say not very much at all.

Not like there aren't counters. Cloaked ships are there to keep targeted effects under control. Two a turn is a high price to pay to keep something from killing the Vulture itself, too. The Vulture itself is very fragile at 2/20 and nobody wants to lose a card for nothing, so paying every turn to keep it alive and block the lane is probably the lesser evil, settling for a long term liability instead of card disadvantage.

Retaliation hurts it a lot too.
PenneyRZ
User avatar
PenneyRZ
Posts: 1391
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:57 pm

Re: Statistics Tracking

Postby PenneyRZ » Thu Nov 03, 2011 9:58 pm

I just wanted to write a few quick notes about brown while I was at it.

For starters, I don't really know why it is underplayed at this moment, perhaps the recent changes haven't had time to cause people's opinions of the color itself to change yet and 30 days from now people will be playing brown a lot. It is hard to tell.

The color doesn't have a lot of board control, but it does have a huge top end and with the new carrier it has more board control than it had.

The new Combat Support card can easily go into slots 31 - 34 for no real drawback over the board and quite a big plus, or the color could use them to drop to a 26 card deck if they prefer that.

The new 7/25 with 2 damage per turn for 4 is pretty strong. Artillery Cruiser is similarly strong. They also have denial protection now. Ambush is also really good early game.

It seems to me that they have pretty solid ships for fighting against rushes and also that they have protection against problem ships and a way to get around quick base damage, so they shouldn't be too bad off right now.

Maybe most of it just isn't very glamorous, though.

I would like to see the anti denial land get pushed up to 10 hp gain, though. That way people won't have to get rid of those lands to play better +hp lands instead. This is less of a concern, though, because the color did get the combat support action and the spawned ships still heal the base.
PenneyRZ
User avatar
Williegb
Posts: 67
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 10:34 am

Re: Statistics Tracking

Postby Williegb » Thu Nov 03, 2011 10:46 pm

How exactly are the win-rates per color calculated?
User avatar
Greywing
Posts: 3086
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 5:47 pm
Contact:

Re: Statistics Tracking

Postby Greywing » Thu Nov 03, 2011 10:56 pm

Win rate = wins / (wins + losses).
For humans, for instance, who have 364 recorded wins and 558 losses, the rate is 364 / 922 = 39.48% of all games played are won.

If you compare than then with 50%, which is the average win rate if everything was balanced perfectly, humans get 39.48% out of 50%, which is 78.96% or 21.04% below what it should be.
SVC - NULLL games.
Found a bug or have a question? PM me or post on the forum.
User avatar
space-mariner51
Posts: 775
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2011 2:39 am

Re: Statistics Tracking

Postby space-mariner51 » Thu Nov 03, 2011 11:08 pm

On the CA, they do have a problem of weak ships at 1-3 :ca: . Assault Dorgan and Thorgram Bomber both need more defense. The Freighter needs to be 1-2 :ca: cheaper so if you got unlucky on structures, it's easier to play it and spam its ability instead of being forced to play a cheaper ship to buy enough time to try again. The CA also should get a ship at 2 :ca: that can withstand a Nagato or a Soldier Drone.
User avatar
Williegb
Posts: 67
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 10:34 am

Re: Statistics Tracking

Postby Williegb » Thu Nov 03, 2011 11:23 pm

What designates a deck as one color or another? Can one deck register as multiple?
User avatar
Greywing
Posts: 3086
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 5:47 pm
Contact:

Re: Statistics Tracking

Postby Greywing » Thu Nov 03, 2011 11:32 pm

In this case i simply went with the highest number of cards. It means every deck has only one color in these statistics. In case a deck equal amounts of multiple colors, the first race would become the deck race, in this order : hu-ca-xy-cc-rv-mt-tm-rd-artifact. So a deck with 30 human and 30 ca'anian cards would be seen as a human deck in the end.

There are many statistics that can be gotten from the pvp decks that have been recorded thus far. The ones i posted here are those that were easiest to calculate. Stuff like which combo of dual color decks is the most popular or the most used, will be quite tricky to figure out.

Even so, the stats we have here probably do give a pretty good indication of the relative power level of the various races.
SVC - NULLL games.
Found a bug or have a question? PM me or post on the forum.
User avatar
PenneyRZ
Posts: 1391
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:57 pm

Re: Statistics Tracking

Postby PenneyRZ » Thu Nov 03, 2011 11:33 pm

In case anyone cares, the usage rates are (wins + losses for color) / (total wins + losses for all colors)

Vs nominal 12.5% usage rate is calculated just like Admin did with the vs avg 50% win rates calculation.

The Hybrid Index is probably much more complicated than people here care to see the equations for.
PenneyRZ
Rokossovski
Posts: 160
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 10:23 pm

Re: Statistics Tracking

Postby Rokossovski » Thu Nov 03, 2011 11:35 pm

Freighter just got a big boost from Penney, I don't think it'll get much cheaper, Mariner.

As someone who plays green a lot, I don't think it's weak except against techno, purple and denial decks which were leading over the last month, but have been tamed. The combination of plasma's and bombers is deadly, and you usually have two of those on turn 2. If green isn't bothered by support effects, it's probably the deadliest color on the board by it's ability to direct damage, especially in the early game.

I already often spalsh it with red for the darkwing; having another "minus attack" ship might be too much (could possibly lead to abuse and "un-fun" if splashed to Venom as well).
User avatar
Kuro
Posts: 645
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 10:21 pm
Location: France

Re: Statistics Tracking

Postby Kuro » Thu Nov 03, 2011 11:39 pm

Minimal attention to card theme should be considered, in the case of the Freighter : it can buffed up a bit in term of stats, or provide some more ressources, but really I think that a -X attack effect does not fit on it.

Return to “Hidden Dimensions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest