The Best Heroes-A Statistical Community Effort

Full, updated thread in General Discussion forum: https://greaterthangames.com/forum/topic/sentinels-statistics-project-2893

So, as an extension from the Mister Fixer Underpowered? thread, there appears to be desire to start gathering statistics on the most effective heroes, and just some stats in general, this is a really cool community project that could use your help!

Please submit games to the following link, and if you see a way that games could be submitted better, certainly post on this thread! We can use all the help we can get :)

Here is the link to the fan-made statistics form

Here is a link to the list of submitted games. 737(!) so far!

Data Compilations:

This is a link to the third compillation of stats, after nearly 1000 games. Really cool info, but we need more games!

Edit: Today's 2 games with 2-3 new players.

Villain: Baron Blade(O)

(# Number of Heroes) Wraith, Legacy, Fanatic 

Megalopolis

Win

Villain: Akash' Bhuta(O)

(# Number of Heroes) Absolute Zero, Agent Ardent, Bunker, Tempest.

Insula Primalis

Win

[Side Question: Does damage from Limbs count as extra nemesis, forgot to include those. But at no point was AA ever below 10 health so I do not think it mattered.] Answered - Thanks AWP. Okay cool wasn't sure only recently got IR.

Villain [REDACTED](O)

(4)[REDACTED], [REDACTED], [REDACTED], Nightmist

[REDACTED]

Win

Comments: This one was close, but we mostly won thanks to [REDACTED].

Am I doing it right? :-D

 i commend your effort,   it would really be better if this could be done on a spreadsheet or something where you just enter data.  But I'm not that computer savvy.  I also want to say that it's unrealistic to start predicting trends until MANY games have come in.   The Arkham Horror stats have literally thousands of games logged in them, which is why they're so useful.   Also this only works if people make a comittment to logging every game they play, not just games they win =p.   Not accusing you or anything, I realize it probably just worked out that way.   But obviously if people only post wins with their favorite character, it's going to skew the data.

incidentally, no, limbs don't get nemisis bonuses.   I think the only times the nemesis bonus applies in that fight is for Entoumb and for the Avatar of Destruction attack.

My issue with a spreadsheet is recording turn order, do you guys think we need to differentiate say...

Wraith, Legacy, Visionary

from

Legacy, Visionary, Wraith?

 I DO think that player order makes a difference.   But I don't think it makes too much difference,  you could probably ignore it.   I dunno.   If you want to try to work it out that would be cool, but I'm not  how to do a workaround without comprimising the core intent of the project.

Incidentally, follow this link to see what I was talking about.   If you look at the bottom tabs and go to "Investigators"  you can see the characters and their win%, along with many other pieces of data.   Patrice is only SECOND best at 76% victory, with Mandy Thompson being top at 77%.   Vincent Lee is near the bottom at around 58%, but he's not dead last, like I expected.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AliZyklaTCWzdEszdXpoRVJQNGltTU5wMi1qWEJnQkE&hl=en#gid=2
 

Thats...really Impressive. Any idea how that was created? As in, do people personally add in their own stats, or was there a forum thread like this, and then someone added all the data in later?

As I posted in the other thread,

 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ApaVTp-7PJbQdF85eVZRQnBOX3FPQW9JQUcyM2FKdkE

That is the link to an in progress way to collect data. For those of you with time, patience, and/or know how, please feel free to adapt it to make it work, I just wanted to lay an example groundwork.

(I think order of heroes is important. An online form is a cool idea. As long as data can be extracted in CSV format, we can use many tools )

Type : Full Random Setup, Solo

Villain : Akash'bhuta (O)

Heroes : (4) Absolute Zero, Tempest, Wraith, Fanatic

Environment : Megalopolis

Results : Win (no incapacitated hero)

Comments :

• Slow moving game, thanks to Megalopolis.
• Hero Hp at the end : between 11 and 13, with Tempest focusing on healing at the end.
• Notable : AZ first did damage, but was soon limited to tank, because of ongoing destruction. Wraith was slow to start.
• Final move : 7 cards Inventory Barrage + End of Days.

 I really ought to have included that... 

Yes, it's mostly automated.   If you had just played a game and wanted to record it, you would go to this link here:   (feel free to mess around, but please don't hit Submit unless you actually played a game).   Tibs is the creator and does regular updates but I'm not entirely sure to what extend things are automated and to what extent he does things himself.   As I said, I believe it's mostly automated, as when I've submitted games in the past the changes immidiately show up on the stats page, if I'm recalling correctly.   Anyway, here's the form to submit a game.   I imagine you could copy most of the code, or contact the creator and ask him how he did it.

https://spreadsheets.google.com/viewform?key=paPMgoencsRppq3PEYWXmQQ&hl=en

(Until we have some online solution, I keep archiving games here for later use)

Type : Full Random Setup, Solo

Villain : Apostate (O)

Heroes : (4) Bunker, The Visionary, Tempest, Wraith

Environment : Wagner Mars Base

Results : Win (no incapacitated hero)

Comments :

• Hard win ! Apostate, with the help of Wagner Base (especially villainous weaponry) manages to bring all his relics out very fast and do tons of damage, while the heroes slowly dispatched relics - untill :
• Last second ultra combo : all heroes were down to exactly 3 HP when Visionary entered her cocoon and Wraith managed to at last equip her Smoke Bombs.
• Without the above combo, the game would have been lost, as Apostate still had 40 hp at the time...
• After a good starting set up, alas destroyed by Apostate, Wraith was really slow. Targeting Computer appeared only in the last turns.
• Tempest used Localized Hurricane for most of the game, and never had any Rain card in hand.
• Finishing move : a three card Omnicanon (only use of the canon in the game, as it entered play only one turn before the end) + Visionary finishing the last HP with a Mind Spike.

Okay

So the Forum thing is awesome, a direct aspect of Google Drive - They just do it straight up, and it auto records to a spread sheet.

So here is the form

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dFVreEhkOWJYcmlvcDNMbWppejh5aGc6MQ

im working right now on manipulating the Spreedsheet to start showing up information like the Arkham horror stats one. 

And awp, no one has been trying to draw conclusions yet. You're right, we need -lots- of data, of both wins and looses. But the only way to get that data is to start somewhere! I'll connect this to the wiki too

edit:

wow.

It looks like he updates that spreedsheet manually monthly. There should be a way to automate it, but from what I can tell from the cell pull information, and the (This is updated monthly) near the form link, it appears to be manual. Thats some dedication.

Well the form is created, people should start entering their games and their wins, losses. I included a few other things - Promo heroes as their own selection (so we can see is Absolute Zero Elemental Wrath more powerful or not?) and a few survey questions so we can refine the information a little bit more. Most important I think was Incapitated heroes addition. 

Zelink, not to rain on your parade - Iw ould have used your form if I could, but creating a brand new form makes its own spreadsheet.

But maybe you should add the link to your opening post?

Rain all over it :) I don't proclaim to be great at any of this, I'm content with just being a catalyst!

Great :)

But do edit the first post and add a link. I linked from the Wiki too, hopefully that will make it easier for people to find and start submitting games.

Wins AND losses people!

Poor Tempest, he got forgotten.

The "number of incapacitated heroes" radio buttons should probably have a 0 field as well, or an accidental click could mean you'd have to start the form over again.

What are you talking about? Tempest has been there all along << >> XD 

And good call Garou. Added (And addedtempest too)

Maybe we could link to posts in this thread (or other) in the comment section, for additional informations ? Comments are not usable for statistics - but they can give ideas about the kind of datas that can be useful to add to the survey.

Do you want to include the alternate villains?

For incapacitated heroes, instead of having a radio button for 0-5 and a free-text field for which heroes, how about:

Have five dropdowns for choosing the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th heroes.

Then have a checkbox for 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th heroes that allows one to set incapacitated or not.

It's good that the information is on there for future use, but any playtesters should probably not be posting playtest games on here.  Since the characters have not yet reached their final incarnations, we don't want any possible imbalances or massive changes to throw off the intent of the project.  While I think the characters are very close to what they will be, better safe than sorry.

That probably means I won't be posting my games on here for a while.  :(

i like that. Lets you set it up so that you can also show play order.

Done. Im going to have to try to see if i can move the responses around though, its all crazy out of order now on the spread sheet.:/

I also wonder if the Promo heroes should have subdivisions, in some way.  Maybe you'd be able to look at the total number of winning games that Wraith has been in, and then see how many were for each of her different cards.

I added the link to the form in the top post, and made this topic sticky. Have fun you guys! I love me some statistics :)

Is it me or the form is missing Unity?

Great work, by the way.

it is I forgot her and the scholar when I updated the format. fix it tonight

yeah at the moment this is still just data collection. Once we have the data we can display it however we want

Is it worth allowing for 2 person games?

I recommend setting all variables to default to blank. Force people to put in valid information. Don't let them accidentally leave invalid information in place.

Question like 'Did the game feel ...' could use a n/a or maybe an unsure option. Give people a way to _unchoose_ if they click on something but later decide they don't want to report anything for that variable.

For variables that allow people to rate something, I find it useful to give people an exactly middle option. I normally apply this guidelines to questions which ask for a numeric rating, but I wonder if it doesn't also apply to the  'feel' question.

I think the 'feel' question is problematic in that it is mixing two different concepts. On the one hand, some of the answers include easy versus challenging. On the other hand one of the answers includes 'good'. What if I think 'easy' is 'good' or if I think 'challenging' is 'good'.

Also, I'm not certain that easy and challenging are opposite of each other. There was a lovely post on BGG a while back about the difference between hard vs challenging.

All that being said, I think this is an important question. I suggest:

How would you rate the difficulty of this game from 1 to 5, where 1 is not difficult at all and 5 is impossible.

 This is great.  I just submitted the game I played last night.    There are a couple of things tho:

1.   Agree with flamethrower, you should take all the playtesting material down for now, until the expansion is released.

2.  Unity and F6 Unity aren't on the page.   I played with F6 unity.

3.  Instead of "did you win"   I would like to see a bit more detail.   Maybe like:   Hero Victory/ Loss (all heroes incapacitated)/  Loss (Mars Base Explosion) / Loss (Baron Blade Terralunar Beam) / Loss (Voss Minion overrun)/ Loss (REDACTED -you know what I'm talking about =p )  so we can see some of the alternate game over conditions in the stats.

I would recommend against including variant setups like 2 hero games in the overall data. If there's a simple way to exclude certain things like that and preferably break them out into their own statistics, then I don't really see a reason not to collect it. I would certainly be interested to see how drastically the villain win percentages swing with different numbers of heroes. And being able to tell people asking about 2-player games that certain villains are stupid easy or stupid hard but certain others come out about the same would be really cool, as there seem to be a number of people who want to play the game that way.

Also, I like awp's suggestion of breaking down the loss by condition.

• Loss : heroes incapacitated/ villain alternate victory condition / environment special

and

• Win : normal / alternate victory condition

should suffice.

Game apreciation is harder. Sometime you feel you win or lose because of the luck of your, or the villain's, draws, or because the nevironment was helpful or not. Sometime your tactics work perfectly. And so on. But establishing a full list of options for this would take much time - and what we want here are data we can analyze easily.

Why not something like "in what shape were the heroes at the end of the game" in case of victory : High Hp? Medium ? Low ?

Maybe a "state of hero at end of game" [incapacitaded; nearly incapacitated, low HP, medium  HP, nearly intact]  would allow us to see if some heroes are more frequently bashed on than others ?

Anyway, I know have to find where I stocked my old statistic lessons...

Ummm, which way are you going here?

Also, lynkfox, can you share the core spreadsheet with some of us? I think changes could/need to be made I really agree that things should default to blank

Workin on Defaulting to Blank right now (But honestly? I do not know if the pull down menus support default to blank where blank isnt an option - and I really want to restrict this to 3hero games and above right now - 2 hero games would be interesting, but the game is balanced supposedly around 3-5... even if i did include the 6th hero option :P - im looking into it though), and changing the 'How did this game feel' option to a numbered system 1-5

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqClP82b_XgZdFVreEhkOWJYcmlvcDNMbWppejh5aGc

you can see the core spreadsheet here, but at the moment Im not opening it up to too many editors. Flamethrower and awp since you two have a lot of experience with this through the Arkham Horror one, if you PM me your google usernames ill add you. We'll go from there - better to not have to many cooks stirring the pot at first.

Remember this is all just data right now. We haven't begun to extrapolate any statistics at all, or even format exactly what we -want- to extrapolate.

Hm yeah that was unclear; there should have been a "however" or something in there. My bad.

I think we should collect 2 hero data, but be careful not to include it when pulling overall win rates. We really only ever want to see it on its own. If it's inconvenient to do that, then it's better to leave it out than pollute the stats with variant plays.

I mean, 2 heroes is an unbalanced unsupported gametype. But wouldn't it be interesting to see HOW unbalanced it is, and it in way it's unbalanced? I feel like if nothing else it would be nice to have something concrete to point to when people ask about 2 hero games so we can explain why it's a bad idea and what to expect if they decide to try it anyway.

In order to /force/ peopel to choose heroes for 1-3 (starting off blank that is) it has to be Multiple Choice - if I use a drop down list and leave the first option blank, if they don't select one it puts a blank in the field.

I went ahead and put for Hero #3 - None - but if you select this option it invalidates your results for the standard statistics, but provides interesting statistics for a side project

So its an option. Better to start collecting that stuff -now- rather than later, and some people who don't realize that the game is 3-5 may try to put a 2hero game in and finding no None put it in the comments... which might be missed when we start inputing all this data

Btw, if anyone has the coding skills to find a way to do that data input automatically, that would be awesome.

I just submitted response to the 2 games I posted above.

I agree that ST cards should not be included as they are still in balancing phase.

Also 2 hero would be interesting, since it is a valid Hero Challenge it should be a valid method to play the game. I think it would also make it an interesting data to collect. (Just make sure in your survey to indicate it is only allowed if H=3 when 2 players).

Again - its all data collection right now. The excell sheet puts the date and time that the survey was submitted, so its quite easy to go through and disregard any that have the Playtesting heroes/villians/environemnts in them before they are finalized and printed.  Rather than having to add all them in later, i find it easier this way with no drawback or effect on any statistics we derive from them in the future.

Speaking of Statistics:

Here is what I think we should be looking at

How often is a Hero in a winning game? (this is also somewhat a stat of popularity mind you so...)

How many games is a Hero reported in?

How many heroes are in the games they win?

How often does each hero win against each Villain? (Set it up like 

Villain 
* Hero 1 win rate
* Hero 2 win rate ect)

How often does a certain environment lead to Loss (To determine the 'harder' environements) - maybe even set it up by villain like above

How often is special Loss Condition met?

What else?

Yeah, win rates for each component are the most important thing. Also, breaking the win rates down by number of heroes would be interesting. Some of the villains actually feel easier with fewer heroes (Spite is the big one), and I'd be interested to see systematic data on that.

Also, the fact that there's a subjective difficulty rating is interesting. I'd be interested to see how closely those match the objective data. It seems plausible to me that there could be certain villains who feel hard but actually the heroes usually beat them.

Another thing I'd be interested to see is did the villain flip. Mainly it's for Gloomweaver, but it would also be interesting on Citizen Dawn, Spite, Ennead. Even Apostate, although that's more of a gauge of playstyle than how the odds come out. Maybe it's overkill? I dunno.

well I can throw up that question on the Suvey - we may never figure out how to use it, but it be good to have it i think (done) 

Fair enough did not think of the time stamp.

Going to add another game just played, just beat Apostate

Clarification: When a card says single source, is it an instance of damage or from one card?

Probably best Koey if you start a new thread for your questions - gonna try and keep this thread on track :p

.... and now slightly off track, having been staring and studying the Arkham Horrors statistics sheet for hints and ideas on how to format ours, I've noticed something.

Awp, Flamethrower? You both played way to much Arkham Horror :P

I'm borrowing quite heavily from the AH page, but you can see my (SUPER) Work In Progress here:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqClP82b_XgZdGJKUVJRakJmZ3RMX2pFUjB3MEtBWHc#gid=0

 This looks pretty sweet,   you're doing great.    and yes, between the two of us we submitted over 300 individual games of Arkham (we played in most of them together, but no double-submissions!) and thats not counting all the games we played before we really started submitting them.  If you motor through it (which we usually did) a game of Arkham takes about 2 hours, so that gives you some idea of how much we played that game =p. 

How about all the 3-4+ hour games at the start. :o

Well, we had all those out of the way before the statistics tracking process began. 

That doesn't mean they didn't add to total hours you invested in the game!

OKay. Back on track :p

I think the most interesting page ive made so far will be this one: 

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqClP82b_XgZdGJKUVJRakJmZ3RMX2pFUjB3MEtBWHc#gid=3

As you can see that page lays it all out by Villain. I'm doing another page similiar that will lay it out by Hero. Also awesome bout those pages is that once i fill in the information on those two i can have it automatically populate to the other pages.

In terms of "length" are you looking for time, or number of rounds? That could perhaps use clarification?

good call. 

both! 

(So I added a new question)

I don't expect that round one to be filled in often. Its more of an 'Idle curiosity, how long does a game often last?'

Oh I think its far more than idle curiosity. It will show if length of game correlates to wins/losses, and if longer combats are better against certain villains, etc. I think it will be quite interesting!

Yeah I agree its a great stat to have - But I don't think it will be filled in very often. I may put an 'Average Game Length' field tho somewhere

Oh geeze, I didn't even realize this thread existed. I have a chart with around 260 games I've played, just for fun... It's heavily skewed with alot of outliers though because I have 3 different playgroups and each playgroup has different amounts of experience and playstyles. I think I'll keep it out of the mix. I'm curious to see how my results differ from the collect forumites data which HAS to be more accurate then mine. (Legacy, Haka, then Mr. Fixer have the highest Win % for reasons I can explain in the case of Haka and Fixer)

It didn't exist before a couple days ago :) And why are your groups any different from anyone elses? I can't speak for everyone, but 260 games seems like a gem of data.

Considering Josul this thread just started this morning, Its not surprising :p

Awesome that you have that data though! Share some of it perhaps in this thread? It be cool to look at.

I have three playgroups.

The First is the university crowd, where I run games for the local gaming organization. It's not uncommon for people who are "half-baked" or new to the game and want to try it out or are very easily distracted and not pay attention or unable to play except on rare occasions. Their skill level is low, and they are very biased on who they pick based on how they look, so Tempest, Nightmist, Absolute Zero, Expatriette, Ra, and Fanatic are picked alot in this group. This group also tends to play extremely selfishly and end up losing close games. 

I also have a casual group, they play with the "pubbies" but know the decks fairly well and do pay attention. They tend to pick heroes at random and have a better win/loss rate. With this group, I have about a 40% win rate due to random heroes sometimes resulting in games where all the heroes dogpiled Ra due to a complete lack of ongoing/environment removal. 

My last playgroup is the "pro" card players. They take all games really seriously (One of them actually became the top sealed MTG player in my state for a short stint). They skew the graph because this group has an 80% win rate on normal modes, and 40% win rate on hardmodes (Not counting classic BB/omnitron from before EE since they count for alot of the advanced mode wins). Haka, and Fixer are two of the players' favorite heroes, and in the meanwhile the university crowd pick them rarely so their win ratio is inflated. 

As a result, I have distinct population separation in my samples. I am willing to wager that if a mass of people enter their data, you will have a better distribution of skill-levels instead of having distinct peaks making for a more accurate representation. 

I only kept track of how many times a hero was picked, how many times they won, how many times a villian was fought/won with hard-mode being separate.

You raise interesting points... but ... thats awesome part of data collection

What I would suggest? Enter a few games in a week - not all 260 of em. Do like 20 or 30 games total a month (5 or 10 from each of your play groups, for instance) and put them in over time. You're right - if you enter /all/ the data in right now, it would skew the comparisions to be -your- playgroup, cause even in a months time there probably wont be enough data otherwise.

But this is overall data. When I put in games?  Its going to be very much like your last group. We're all pro(ish) players. We have a 80-90% win rate. We all play Legend of the Five Rings competitively (Some better than others << >> ... ie not me.) - we have a couple of players who routinely get into the final cut of the Koteis.  - Or very very close to doing so. 

The data we're collecting is going to (eventually, months down the road) be all inclusive. Its going to include the ones just having fun and screwing around (Your college group) and its going to include the pros. And its going to include the middleground. We need it all.  Afterall, if Tachyon routinely ends up in a winning group even with a hundred 'screwing around' games with her, its going to show she is more effecient at winning than others (I'm not convinced this will be the case but thats what the data is for! :P)

But i would suggest slowly entering it. Put in 15-30 games a month until you get through them, then just put in the games you usually play each month. That way you wont overly skew the first couple months data.

I am going to say, however - This is not going to be like the Akrham horror one. Having played that game a few times, its a Fantasy Flight Game - and a lot of those games are kinda -ment- for you to loose more than you win XD

I think that even against 4s, you are still ment to win quite a lot - I'm willing to bet there will be far far far more wins than looses. I mean in my playgroup, like I said, we only loose one or two times a month.  

edit:::

Assuming your data fits with what we're collecting. If it doesnt, well then that makes sense  too :P

The win rate on the Arkham Horror one is currently 63%, which is quite definitively won more than lost.  The data set is perhaps skewed, though it's hard to really tell in what way.  The people who are the type to fill out an online form to log their plays are the type of people who spend their time on the forums, seeking perhaps to better their play.  They would also, perhaps, be more the type to try out the harder villains and not mind losing to them as much, or keep using the weaker characters in an effort to get them to do better.

Yeah, Sentinels is in general an easier game, but the complex levels of difficulty make for some interesting numbers to track.  I suspect we'll see a good share of losses as well.

Indeed. And ive put together some different trackign ways then they are in that AH one - they just track by individual Old One and Investigator, im going to see if a given hero wins more often against a given Villain or in a given environment ect. 

I've submitted a play. Now, where do I see the stats?

The stats arent put together yet. We don't have nearly enough data (only something like 30 or 40 games atm)

You can look at the list of games submitted and get an inkling of what you see - 

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqClP82b_XgZdFVreEhkOWJYcmlvcDNMbWppejh5aGc#gid=0

is all the submitted games to date. Gives you some idea, but no hard data. 46 (as of this posting) games is such a small slice of data to even be close to useless. :P

Its going to be months before we get any signifigant data. But its worthwhile to build too!

hey guys

I just want to say about halfway through the month we have about 75 games. Thats pretty awesome! If this keeps up we can easily see around 125-150 games for the month, which while not a definitive statistical pool, ist still a pretty awesome one for our first month.

This stuff is great, encourage your friends, reference this sticky, get people posting games! :)

I was wondering, can we get this stickied on other forums as well on this site? I feel like a lot of proficient gamers hang out on this one, but perhaps we would get a broader pool on the other threads?

I was actually considering seeing if we could get a 'Awesome Stuff For Sentinels Fans!" thread stickied in theGeneral, with links to the Wiki, this thread, Spiffs stuff, anything else we can come up with that should go in there...

I don't visit the Rules and Gameplay forum enough, clearly. This is an awesome idea! Hopefully youll get a nice big data set to do some interesting analysis. Do we have any bond fide statisticians on the board? Or anyone who knows one? Some advice on how best to organise the data would be helpful, to make analysis easier down the road.

On the topic of analysis, I'd be really interested in more complex analysis that could be done to check certain combinations of heroes or other combinations of factors. For instance, how often does Fanatic win when paired with Legacy compared to without him? How much worse is the Chairman in Rook City compared to Insula Primalis? Or how often does [REDACTED] win in [REDACTED] games? (often, I expect). How does the presence or absence of healing heroes affect games against plague rat? Or how important is it to have [REDACTED] in games against [REDACTED]? (pretty important).

Also, knowing how often people lose to villains of particular difficulties will be very interesting when developing further villains - how often does >G want a level 4 villain to win?

Answering most of these questions with a usefully small confidence interval will require many hundreds or even thousands of data points. Sounds like fun!

i would love to do which 'Teams' win most often, but given the number of combinations of heroes (yeaaah. thats a lot. if i remember my  math right its... 15x14x13+15x14x13x12+15x14x13x12x11 ... but i was always bad at math) without a computer crunching the data i don't know if that would be even possible to do. 

The advantage is that allll the data will always be stored in the file. And I believe ive set it up well enough that we can crunch new information from old data eventually, if we choose to. Like I made sure we're asking about team order, but havent figured out a way to accurately figure out how that effects heroes (like is Team Leader Tachyon better in first slot or last slot? When is it best to put Argent Adept?) 

I'm also not a statitician :P

But at least by the end of the month we should be looking at 150-200 usuable entries in one month. Thats awesome and a good starting point. Put 3 in myself last night!

Just put in my first contributions. Great work on this, guys.

After this weekend ill be compiling the first months data. We have about 150 entries at the moment (most of them from Sound of Trees lol!) and we'll take a look on what that means. We'll loose a few due to having Playtesting stuff in them before it was pretty much finalized, but still a good start. Not nearly enough to create truely accurate data, but it is a -start-.

So far I'm surprised to see that about 25% of games are a loss. That is surpising to me given that in my playgroup we only loose about 10%

I did not enter my last games - I am jobless and play at least three games a day, if I keep entering everything there will be too big a bias.

Edit : I made a little analysis of the data some times ago, and many results were quite surprising. Barn Blade, especially, seemed more dangerous than we are used to think - maybe because some entries are from newer teams ?

Go ahead and post all your games.  We want raw data now.  A little more bias towards the SoundofTrees playstyle won't ruin anything.  I'm sure we'll get a lot of interesting people logging their plays here, and things will even out.  I'm storing up a bunch of post-playtest games to post once the known incarnations of the new guys are confirmed as accurate.

On another note, I have seen people talking about how they were doing something particular (like sprucing up his mechanics to have fun with Gloomweaver), but had to stop because they want to post their games.  I say just have the fun you want to have, and don't post the game.  If this results in fewer games against the official Gloomweaver, so be it.

Just to say that I'm totally stoked about this initiative, I'm a stat freak.  As a matter of fact, once I become more familiar with the game I may be able to help you compile some of these statistics.  I will let you know (i am receiveing the game soon), that I will totally contribute to this although the majority of my submissions (likely between 66% - 75%) will be solo plays.

I have been watching the forum for quite a while but this is my first post. I only started to upload data since this week and so far I have uploaded 8 games if I'm not wrong and my winning rate is around 50%. I only play solo with 3 heroes and there are a lot of times I can tell I can win by having just one more hero. However I prefer the challenge of using 3 heroes, plus 4 characters do take up a lot of space.

I did go through all the data had been collected, and it is pretty obvious that the winning ratio of 3 heroes is much lower than that of 4 heroes. So I guess it is safe to say that it's not really fair to judge the rate  merely  from winning or loser while neglecting the number of players. Although the H mechanics was introduced to have a better balance among different number of players, that does not change the fact that the more heroes there are, the easier it will be.

yeah im excited to get into this  - probably will be transfering over the stuff to the 'data sheet' on tuesday afternoon, or weds morning (Have a new years eve party to go to, dont know when Ill be home lol)

As for the Playtest, I believe they have hit their final iteration and any changes that occur will be minor in effect that it -should- be fine for us to start including them now as of Jan. Unless something major shows up in the playtesting forms...

The First Statistics are POSTED!!!

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqClP82b_XgZdGJKUVJRakJmZ3RMX2pFUjB3MEtBWHc#gid=0

(zelinke, if you dont mind addding that link to the first post please?)

Couple things

1) I gotta find a better way to do this. It took me nigh on 9 hours to input everything. Admittedly i was getting up and moving, and reorganizing the charts, setting up some auto populating fields so i wouldnt have to enter everything 3 times, and completely started over after about an hours worth of work cause i wanted a better way to do it... but still. Oy. )

2) So with that above thought - They are not currently sorted by most effecient or whatever - becaue apparently googledoc excell cannot sort a field once it has a formula in it and i used a lot of formulas to make it much easier for me to enter things.

3) I am going to work over the next few days on seeing if i can make this much quicker and easier for myself, so that form may change somewhat in the final days. I think I have a way to do it, but we'll see.

4) I threw out ALL the playtester data entries. The decks I think are 99% done now, so any future ones ill put in, but just to be safe, there is no playtester data in this release. So with that in mind there are only 170ish data points - meaning that this data is far from conlusive in anyway, so PLEASE remember that.

5) Chairman is the most dangerous with a only a 60% loss rate.

6) Baron Blade is surprisingly second with a 43% loss rate - i chalk this up to new players and baron being their first one. With more data this will probably smooth out.

7) Legacy Trounced his Nemisis with a 100% win rate (including Mad Bomber, and promo Legacies) over like 10 games

8) Fanatic did well to at 100% over Apostate with 2 games

9) Sadly for my feelings, Expatriette and Mr Fixer could not defeat their Nemisis with 0% win rate (1 game for Expat, and 4 games for Fixer)

10) Regular Ra did not ever play the Ennead, but Ra: Horus of the Two Horizons played them once and defeated them.

11) Megalopolis was the most played in enviorment, but the Ruins of Atlantis were the most dangerous with a 44.44% loss rate.

12) 4 Hero teams won nearly 80% of t he time, while 3 hero teams barely 54%. 5 hero teams (with only a 9 count of games) won 88%of the time.

13) The most played hero is Absolute Zero (with 43 games)

14) Spiffs Randomizer is the most popluar way to play, while Picking your team follows next.

Anyway. Thats some interesting stuff i saw.

Feel free to browse through it but please remember again, this is a small data pool and we have a long way to go before any conclusive information is presented.

If it makes you feel better, I logged a play last night with Mr. Fixer beating The Chairman.

Also, a big thank you for putting this together :D

When I think of the hundreds of games I've played that are not represented here ... I want to make sure I put all the future ones in.

I'm going to try to keep better track of all the games I have played and post them up as well. I tend to play a lot of solo games with only three heroes, that would probably increase the percentage of wins for that catergory at least if I were to tally that in there. So from now on I will carry a sheet of paper inside my game box so I can right down the stuff.

Not sure if this was mentioned, but I think tracking if the game was played solo or multi player might provide some good information.

Solo wise, I would suspect players would tend to win more - being able to strategize and coordinate better, etc.

I dunno. We coordinate pretty heavily in our multiplayer games. I would actually expect multiplayer games to have a higher win rate because you have more eyes on everything to catch stuff the one person might miss.

I just want to say that this is incredibly awesome. Keep up the great work!

Wow. With some deep research there is a lot that excell sheets can do!

If you go take a look at the 'raw data' of the form youll see a few additional sheets - live time updating! (sorta, mostly, up to a certain point then it seems i have to manually update the ranges it pulls data from)

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqClP82b_XgZdFVreEhkOWJYcmlvcDNMbWppejh5aGc#gid=0 -- to take a look - see the new sheets on the bottom? 

Anyways, villain is done, still have to do Hero - but im going to have to go through all 187 games and add the incap field in manually, since i changed how it was done on the form - and its a good thing I did, cause it makes the method ive learned to gather the data much easier.

once all this is done, next month ill be able to just manually enter the data into the 'official statistics' one (the one that looks pretty with colors) and then can sort by greatest to least, makint it -much- clearer, and get some awesome looking graphs in there as well :)

another post on the update

I only have a few more forumals to work out (man all these paranthesis are driving me INSANE!) and then all the data can be pulled automatically from the sheet ...

and in the process ive already noticed some issues - like some how i missed a game here, or there, or input things wrong :P With 175ish entries its no surprise i made some mistakes! When I finish these formulas I may 'rerelease' the january update, in order to make things perfect :)

(if any of you are curious, here is the formulat to determine if a hero was in a 5 player game)

=if($A$1="is_calculation_on",ArrayFormula(SUMPRODUCT( ((first_hero=$A3)+(second_hero=$A3)+(third_hero=$A3)+(fourth_hero=$A3)+(fifth_hero=$A3))-( (first_hero=$A3)+(second_hero=$A3)+(third_hero=$A3)+(fourth_hero=$A3))*(fifth_hero="(None)") ) ),"off")

there - might- be a more effecient way to do that? but... im not a mathmatician, statician, or engineer :p

This formula seems to add up all of the times a hero was used and then remove the times in which that hero was used in a 4-hero game. What about 3-hero (or even 2-hero) games?

Suggestion: Use some intermediate cells. One possibility is to first calculate how many times a hero was used in a two-hero game, than use that result to help calculate how many times a hero was used in a three-hero game, then use that result to help calculate how many times a hero was used in a four-hero game, etc. Another possibility is for each game to calculate a cell that marks the game as to how many heroes were in it, and then calculate how many heroes were in a five-hero game by only adding up games that are already marked as five-hero games.

What would REALLY help you is if you could use functions. Apologies if this is something you know already, but what a function does is wrap up a set of calculations that you want to use more than once so you don't have to write it more than once. There are lots of heroes, so you are probably copying and pasting the formula you use to calculate the number of times a hero was used in a five hero game for each hero. If you could write the formula once and put in into the function, than you could just call that function for each hero, so if you ever needed to fix/change/upgrade the formula, you could just fix/change/upgrade the function. Welcome to the world of programming! This can be done in Microsoft Excel using Visual Basic for Applications.

im not sure if Gdocs Sheets can handle functions - as once a budding computer scientist (before i flunked physics 3 times and decided to  be a chef :P) I did indeed try to see if i could use functions, but was unable to find the process for doing so. Because for some reason attempting to download the gdoc corrupts the file every time, ive kept everything in gdoc for now Yet to find a way around this (it might be because im using gdoc regions, which are namesets in excell and may not translate properly. Or because im still using 2010 excell?) -- If you know how to use functions in Gdocs Sheets ill gladly take the advice for ease of updating later.

and i am not certain why it does not -need- the - 3 hero games (i remove the 2 hero games from the data sheet manually)  -- when I put in the - 3 hero game section it ends up giving me like 30 games. Which is far from correct. I /believe/ it is because of the way the data is laid out -- 

hero name, incap, heroname, incap, heroname, incap, heroname, incap, heroname, incap -- all in seperate cells-

so a 3 hero game looks like

heroname, incap, heroname, incap, heroname, incap, none, incap, none, incap

and a four looks like

heroname, incap, heroname, incap, heroname, incap, heroname, incap, none, incap

so in calculating the pair, and removing the 4 hero games from a the pool of 5 player games, it is automatically removing the 3 hero games as well.... that -shouldn-t be what its doing but everything ive double check and manually checked says its calculating the correct number. I don't know enough to tell you why

(im still trying to figure out exactly how ArrayFormula and SUMPRODUCT work, actually - why does finding the number of times a villain used give the same value with both -  =ArrayFormula(SUMPRODUCT((villains=$A3))) and =ArrayFormula(SUMPRODUCT((villains=$A3)*(villains=$A3))) --- shouldnt that expodentially give a value thats all wrong for the second formula? But it doesn't - they give the same value. Why?

it has been a long time since my programming days (10 years about) and trying to keep all the () straight in a single line is killer. Why can't excell (gdoc sheets in this case :P) have a multi line editor? (and if it does and you know where it is pleeeassee tell me?)

double post cause i think my post got too long and it stopped putting carriage returns in  (oor because i copied directly out of gdoc sheets it left some residue cell information somwhere in there and wouldnt process a return - silly things)

for instance you can see here(maybe)

There is no way in the stats page to relate an alternate victory condition.  As of right now, we have to write them in the notes field.  I think this would be best solved by having different answers to the game won/lost section.  It seems to me like this would be easier to code, too, but hell if I know anything about that. 

What was the result of the game?

• Victory by destroying the villain
• Victory by destroying Gloomweaver's Relics
• Defeat by incapacitation
• Defeat by Terralunar Impulsion Beam
• Defeat by Voss's Minion Overrun
• Defeat by Omnitron's devices after Omnitron's defeat
• Defeat by [redacting] [redacted]

• Defeat by Mars explosion.
• Defeat by Silver Gulch [redacted].

Given the way that i am pulling the stats, that doesn't ... quite... work

but ill change the question on 

If you Lost, was it because of HP or an Alternate Loss Condition?Enter: Incapacitated if every hero was taken out, or a cards alternate loss - such as TerraLunar Beam, or Self Destruct Sequence

to something more easy to understand (a checkbox like that, probably)

It's not just the alternate loss conditions to worry about - it's any alternate win conditions, like Gloomweaver's relics.  We need to try to have a way to put that into the form proper, rather than just the notes field.

gloomweaver relic is on that new version of that question and it now says how did the game end rather the how you lost

Excuse me, but I am a little confused by these "most effective" numbers.  I would assume that means one hero from every game is considered the most effective from the game, but then they shouldbe averaging out in the high twenties, insteaf of the low seventies.  Is every hero except one considered "most effective" each game?  If so, why?

If I'm not mistaken, Most Effective is merely the percentage of winning games that the hero played in, not a title assigned to one character per game.  Legacy was in 36 games, 31 of which the heroes won.  If we define "effective" as (at least theoretically) contributing to a win, then he is 86.11% effective.  

Flamethrower is right. Without sitting down and watching every single game, and then coming up with some way to measure 'effectiveness' within the game, there is no way to determine who is most effective in any indivdiual game.

Rather that stat is simply - THis hero wins more than others - Legacy rarely ever is in a loosing game.  -- 83percentof the time (as of this post) if legacy isin the game,  the heroes win. You can draw from that (moreso once we have more data) that legacy is a large contributing force to wining the game 

of course with our current data #s its not perfect. Wraith:Price of freedom has won 100% of her games. Of course shes only been in 2 games XD  But we're easily pushing 200-300 games a month (we have over 130ish new games n the tracker already and its only half way through the month!)  and that just means that it will continue to get more and more accurate as time goes on. 

But you also can't look at a hero just by that single stat - its ment to be a quick 'This is the most likely to be in a winning game' stat yes, but ther are other things to consider

like Legacy -also- has a 23% incap rate. Meaning in 23% of his games he was incapitated. But that doesnt add up to a 100 if you notice with the wins... because ~30%  of the time if he was incapitated, the heroes still won.  -- which is one of the better numbers in that category. Which all this does is prove with numbers and hard data that Legacy is one of the 'More Successful' heroes in the game (i refuse to say /better/ but there is clearly a track record here that needs to be noted.

The one statistic I can't see on the sheet, and the on I am most interested in, is of the wins how many occurred with at least one hero incapacitated? Almost all of the wins in my group are with all heroes up, we find that heroes are like dominos, once one falls it's hard to keep any standing.

hmm. Im not sure how to formulate that to pull information from the sheet, though I think I could. 

But you can also look at the Raw Data  at https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqClP82b_XgZdFVreEhkOWJYcmlvcDNMbWppejh5aGc#gid=0 

and do a quick scan yourself - ill try to see if i can't pull a formula out for that one - might not make it onto the official sheet but would be availabel to view elsewhere

I think I can be of assistance with that. If I download the raw data as an excel file I'm fairly certain I can write a formula which would calculate the percentage of games won with various heroes/positions incapped. The only thing I don't know is if Google Docs uses the same formula commands as excel.

it does and it doesnt - it does not have all the commands (other wise i would be using Functions instead of arrayFormula 's ... bleh.)

you can look at the format for the setup to see if you can try to write a formula, but again - a good chunk of the commands that excell has arent in gdocs yet

Having actually had some free time that I did not spend on playing Sentinels, I spent my free time making some quick formulas to analyse data about Sentinels!

Just some quick calculations on incapacitated heroes and the current results;

There are 48 wins with incapacitated hereoes (12.73%)

There are 203 wins with no incapacitated hereoes (53.85%)

There are 126 losses (no matter the status of the heroes) (33.42%)

Looks like 1 in 7 wins is a win with an incapacitated hero, higher than I would have thought. My personal stat is 3 incap wins out of 27 total wins (48 games total), so I'm at average for incap wins but letting the side down with almost 50% losses!

(I can provide the formulas I used if people want them for the spreadsheet, I wrote them on Excel)

I just want to say.

Vossh has now overwhelmed the earth with his Minions once.

And Baron Blade has crashed the moon into it /twice/

Awesome. Just. Awesome.

I've started keeping a note of our game stats so I can contribute here - Just uploaded our stats for this weekend :). I went home early 'cause of the snow and didn't want to risk that the trains might not be running later this evening (plus it'd be dark and even colder by then). So we didn't get round to fighting Blade, Rat, Gloomy, or the Ennead. We did the other eight, though. And finally beat the Matriarch after ages of failing to do so! And we did it in Atlantis (we choose our villain and environment combos via dice roll, so this is never our choice!), where she kicked our arses twice last week! Legacy's combo of Fortitude, Lead from the Front, and Next Evolution (Psychic immunity) meant we could basically ignore all penalties for killing birdies even before she flipped :D. Plus Haka had eaten most of her stuff by the latter half of the game - he had the Mask, both cohorts, and a load of other birdies all stuffed under Savage Mana. Bunker managed to get a few cards under his Omni-Cannon and in the last round he let rip with this (buffed by both Legacy and the Adept, as was Haka), dropping the Matriarch's health to the point where Haka could unleash his own assult with Savage Mana, finishing her off :D.

We had a similar victory earlier against Citizen Dawn, in which Haka had about nine(ish) cards under Savage Mana, plus was buffed by Legacy. He then used Haka of Battle and poured his entire hand (about 17 cards or something like that) into fuelling the damage Savage Mana was about to do. Just to make a big finish of things. Because Dawn had something like 2hp left. Ahh, now that was satisfying :D.

This initiative is superb! Excellent work!

Damnit!

I just submitted a bunch of games and messed up some of the stats, any way to correct them or do I just resubmit the data correctly?

(I submitted 2 games I had won but left the incapacitated boxes ticked on all heroes, looks like they won from beyond the grave!)

let me knw Matchstick, which games they were, and Ill go in and fix them manually. Thats really the only way to do it.

When looking at the villain wins stat, is that the number of times the villain has won, r E number of Ives the heroes won against him?

its not cleare on the Tracker page (with all the raw data) because im lazy, and i know what i want, but that is actually the Loss Rate. - ie, how many times the heroes have /lost/ against that villain.

Im pretty sure i put a comment on the official reporting one but I may not have, and when i update the report in feburary, ill get some better explination on there.

In what manner did the game end? HP Incapacitation. Does this refer to heroes HP Incapacitation, i.e. a loss? Or villain HP Incapacitation, i.e. a win?

I figured it must be the heroes being beaten by losing all their hp, since very few villains become Incapacitated when beaten - only the Operative and the nine members of the Ennead, as far as I can remember. And this part is for alternative game-ending conditions, so if the game didn't end by you beating the villain by reducing them to zero hp, it's asking how did the game end instead?

That's how I read it, anyway.

it is for heroes. I’ll make a note to make that clearer. If you put it in for the villain it doesn’t matter - I filter out only the ones I want

I see. For my last games (rows 470 and 471), remove HP Incapacitation for me because we won by the standard victory condition.

Also, it's Incapacitation (not Incapitation).

*doh* spelling.

This question is a bit confusing (And by that I mean: I don't understand it at all).

In what manner did the game end? (For non standard Victories)Enter: Incapacitated if every hero was taken out, or a cards alternate loss - such as TerraLunar Beam, or Self Destruct Sequence

•  HP Incapacitation (Heroes)
•  Relic Victory (Gloomweaver)
•  Terra Lunar Impulsion Beam (Baron Blade)
•  Minion Overrun (Voss)
•  Omnitron's Devices After Omnitron died

Shouldn't it say "non standard defeats" ? What does the first one ("HP Incapacitation (Heroes)") mean? And if it just mean that all the heores were incapacitated, how is that non standard? And what does " Omnitron's Devices After Omnitron died" mean? Sorry for being so clueless, but I like to submit my results, and i always have doubst about that one.

I can answer the last one, as it is just basically added information for if somehow a team end up dieing after Omnitron has been defeated but drones are still in play. Since the game continues as long as there is still a device in there. Sure it's still going to be a HP incap. loss but it would be interesting to know when people lose after that point, right?

But then a Relic Victory for Gloomweaver I had interpreted as beating Gloomy by destroying his relics rather than reducing him to 0hp. If he gets out all his relics he doesn't auto-win, he just flips. The only way Gloomy can win is if heroes are all Incapacitated…unless you're fighting on Mars, I suppose, in which case technically everyone loses…

Its a single question to make it only one field foreasy data parsing - but its for the manner in which the game ended -  Yes, gloomys is victory for the players, and the rest are defeats for the players. But gloomy is the only one with a manner in which to defeat him that does not require HP = 0. 

ill try and make the question more clear

Looks like I made a mistake on one of my games I input. Row 502 should of been recorded as a loss.

Today's the last day of Jan 2013, I am soooooo looking forward to the consolidated statistics. Are we having a monthly stat? Or every-game-ever stat?

every game ever ill be updating the report page sometime this evening, around 8 or 9est most likely.

it will be every game ever so that we get a really good and comprehensive data pool.

and I’m excited too!

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqClP82b_XgZdGJKUVJRakJmZ3RMX2pFUjB3MEtBWHc#gid=0

Everything is updated on the Tracker except the individual hero pages

Because its 1230 am, and i have to be up for work at 630am. :P

Ill update those tomorrow afternoon. I also realized i havent yet done a calculation for some statsso i have to figure that part out sstill

However, some fun stuff is already seen

twice has the Ennead flipped without being on Advanced! Wowow!

Gloomweaver has had all his relics destroyed and sent back to the realm he came from 9 times!

Baron Blade has dropped the Moon into the eart 3 times!

The Chairman still reigns supreme with a 55% loss rate. 

Akashbuta has dropped, now the easiest villian to defeat at just 12.5% loss rate

Legacy continues to rack up as the best hero (excluding a few promos that are above him but have less then 10 games) with a 78% win rate.

Again, excluding promos and upcoming heroes with less than 10 games, MR Fixer comes out to be the least effective, with only a 60% win rate

Interesting... Normal Blade is more dangerous than Bomber Blade. And Bomber Blade was supposed to be a redesign to make him harder.

I think there's probably some self-selection going on there. The easiest villains probably get played more by newer players than experienced players, and they also probably tend to get played on advanced more often (it doesn't sound like those overall loss rate number took advanced into account).

My games (I've uploaded a few, but less than twenty so far I think) are probably gonna bias things toward Legacy somewhat (and the Adept), since my partner plays him in more or less every game we play, lol.

that’s the beauty here the ameena. With over 500 games were finally getting to a point where one persons style is not going to overly influence. Even matchstick only has 40 games, something like percentage

and yeah the overall difficulty of villains is overall, all games. But you can see how many advance games and wins they have on the details page to draw you’re own conclusions. Baron blade is probably due to new players… or do we just totally underestimate the ol doctor?

I don't really play Blade unless I'm with new players, FWIW.

Brilliant Work! Added to the Original Post. This is amazing guys, keep the posts coming.

We are really getting to where the number of games is very statistically significant

True enough for  alot of us. We pick up blade everyonce and a while, just for fun. Note, he's also only been played on adnvaced once per our statistics. Interesting.

And for everyone - Individual detail hero data is now in the sheet.

if you do some self cacluating,  its interesting to see - Unity may have the best Incap side - in roughly 23% of the games she was incapped, they still won - which is about a percent higher than the next closest, Visionary (22%)

I find it interesting that Wraith is at the bottom of the pack, in that ~60% group.

Wanna know how awesome Absolute Zero is? He has taken on Ambuscade 1 time and pulled 8 victories. That's what I call pure talent.

Just saying: I've never lost to the chairman on advanced…but today I lost to baron blade on normal.

It is quite strange, yes… Bunker is also down here. It would be interesting to know more about these games. Maybe I should take a look at each game they were in, and see if there is something interesting there…

I am not surprised by Baron Blade : he is easy to defeat - most of the time. But when he wins, he wins big, and fast.

Maybe we should add a "subjective player experience level" to the datas : do you consider yourself/your team [a beginner / somewhat experienced / experienced ]?

I will begin reentering my games. Freedom Five, Forward !

oops. Forgot the 0. XD 10/8 is his record

I too find it interesting that heroes we consider so very powerful (wraith, abzero, haka) are all in the 60s. Which to me actually says they are 'Working as Intended' because a 60% win rate seems like a very valid win rate scenario. I want you to win just over half of your games, close to 2/3rds. With the overall win rate being 65% over all games, you can see that its bumped up by heroes like Tempest and Legacy, but the fact that 9 heroes vrs 7 heroes (ignoring for the moment promo's, playtesting with less than 15 games or so) are under 70%, its kind of cool to see.

What I wonder is now, how does Christopher, Adam, and Paul see these stats? Is this what they intended? Are the heroes lining up with their internal perceptions of how the game should be coming out? Are they thinking that perhaps Akashbutah should be more difficult than a 12% loss rate?

One thing youll probably notice about Baron Blade this time around, he's fallen into the mid 30% for a loss rate against - meaning that most likely, while being more dangerous than any of us take us for as experienced players, he is actually one of he well balanced villains, hitting right in that sweetspot of about 1/3rd of games lost - which seems to be the overall level of the game. Which is cool to know!

There is another thing that makes me marvel at game balance. I did not look at other players data for this, but most of my games, with four heroes, take exactly 7 rounds. I find this quite impressive. It also makes me wonder how many rounds three characters / five characters game can take, and if the duration differences have any impact on the perceived abilities and tactics of each hero...

We just had a couple of...interesing games. Firstly, we had Tempest, the Adept, and Bunker (I've started playing just one hero while my partner plays two - I was the Adept in this game) versus Spite. We eventually managed to very, very slowly claw our way to victory with the Adept and Tempest spamming heals and damage soak to counter the toxic-damage-and-discard-cards drug while Bunker used Turret Mode to plink away at him. The game lasted about an hour and a half but we managed to defeat the bugger with Bunker and Adept's hp at around 2-5 while Tempest was around 11 or something.

Then we had a game versus Gloomweaver - me as the Adept with my partner playing Tachyon and Mr Fixer. It was already not going very well when we had the Chosen Disciple come out in the first round and do five damage in one hit (due to there being three zombies in play at the start, of course). Later we had pretty much every other type of cultist out (two of the one who deals fire and infernal damage) and several zombies. And Strength of the Grave. Within a couple of rounds of starting we were all in or approaching single figure hp totals. Tachyon went down first, then Mr Fixer followed a few rounds later, and finally the Adept. We'd destroyed the Pouch of Bones and had half-destroyed the Grimoire of Curses (which had come out while the Pouch was still at around half health). All in all, rather embarrassing to have been defeated by Gloomy (first time for us), but the cards just went his way. The skinny bastard :P.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqClP82b_XgZdFVreEhkOWJYcmlvcDNMbWppejh5aGc#gid=5

on that page, over on the right, you can see the # of rounds for people who have recorded it.

22 games -  7 rounds

25 games - 8 rounds

28 games - 6 rounds

so yes that appears to be the desired time limit, 6-8 rounds. :)

Lol, our last game against Spite (the one detailed in my previous post on this thread) lasted a record (for us) fifteen rounds! Our fastest has been five rounds (Baron Blade) but mostly then seem to last roughly between six and ten rounds. The thrashing we got from Gloomy earlier took nine.

I don't know that I would want Akash'Bhuta to be more difficult.  All of her games involve her playing cards and shuffling her deck multiple times in a turn.  I worry that if she was beefed up or made to be more challenging that it would just result in the game being more tedious rather than more of a challenge.  Even when she plays five billion cards with multiple Eruptions and Environment plays, her games are still pretty awesome.

Yeah, Akash'Bhuta feels really fun to me. She's easy if you can manage the stuff she has out, but there's always going to be a couple times per game when she spikes tons of cards so fights against her have a really fun and interesting texture. With certain environments she can be a real bear, too.

I wonder how much of that number is sampling bias. I mean, you've already got an expansion at that point so you're probably not going to be playing Akash'Bhuta if you don't have at least one experienced player at the table.

True, you can look at the # of games played - akash only has 30ish games compared to Baron Blades almost 60 games. We're still in low numbers data wise for individual aspects of the game, but its coming together. 

Urgh, we had a game against her last night that lasted about an hour and forty minutes or something. We eventually managed to wear her down but it took ages. The last few games we've played I've reverted to playing just one hero (making a total of three in the team), and those games have seemed more difficult and/or lasted longer than usual.

Based on the stats, 4 players appears to be the general sweet spot for winning.

Here's something we might add: an option for resigned games.  I had a three player game against Iron Legacy where I was playing Nightmist.  I had a situation where Nightmist could survive for a real long time, but her allies were dead, and concluding the game on damage was going to be a struggle.  Since I was playing the game with other people, I conceded, rather than exclude them and play with myself for an hour or two.

sure, ill add that as an option to the ending question

Areson09

I see in your comments you still dont get the ending question

If you do the normal victory, that is if the Villain reaches 0 HP and you win, you enter nothing into that question.

If you have some form of alternate endign to the game (Such as Terra Lunar Beam smashes the moon into the earth, or you remove all of gloomweavers relics and end the game by his alternate condition) then you use that question

Just going to upload my stats for this weekend. We had our longest ever game (at least, since I started keeping track of stats), versus Akash'Bhuta which took about an hour and forty minutes, lasting twenty-three turns! We also had our shortest ever game (again, since stats have been kept), this one against the Ennead, who had their arses handed to them on a plate over the course of a measly four rounds, lasting about fifteen minutes. The game before that, versus Baron Blade, also lasted fifteen minutes, but was two rounds longer.

I do recall that we once got beaten by Voss in about ten minutes, however. I think we may have had a similar game against the Matriarch at one point, both of these ages ago, though.

Thanks. I see you added some clarifying text (or maybe I missed that text before). In case you hadn't thought of it, another way to make the question clear would be to add 'Villain reached 0 HP' as one of the choices.

The EXACT same thing happened with my group last night!  And then we faced off against Miss Information.  We REALLY wish we would have playtested her more.  Games against her are like pulling teeth!  We won, but only after we realized we made a rather large mistake with one of her cards.  It was pretty unsatisfying…

Great statistics.

Wonder how many of those are 2 player controlling 2 each versus 4 players 1 Hero each.

The difference being you have 2 player syncing better than 4 players. Assuming you do not play open hand? 

Subjectively, I don't notice a big difference in effectiveness between a 2 player game and a 4 player game. It's somewhat simpler to coordinate with only 2 players, but with 4 players you have more discussion and more eyes on potential threats. Then again, apparently my group plays relatively slowly? Because our normal games can last 2 hours easy. We spend a lot of time asking what other players can do and talking things over. We're BIG on table talk.

If my games could have more players, they would, but there's only two of us. I prefer to play as one hero so that I can focus better on the one deck, plus it means I have space to lay out my cards without them overlapping (especially in the case of characters like the Adept, the Wraith, and Nightmist, whoe end up with loads of cards in play or in-hand). I don't reckon we've played enough three-hero games yet to see how different they are from the four-hero ones. We've lost a few but we've won most games. And while we had our longest and second-longest ever games this weekend (when we played with three heroes), we also had our shortest ever game. At least, our shortest ever since I started keeping track of the stats - we've had one or two ten-minute wipes on previous occasions :P.

Lynkfox, I had problems recently with the form, and just confirmed that some of my recent games have been entered twice - I'm sorry to give you more work, but you'll have to delete my cloned games (unless there's a way I could do it myself ?).

ill fix im. Its unforutnately getting slower and there isnt much I can do about that :p

its a limitation of gdocs.

Since I started keeping stats, we've played around 40 games and had only six losses...three of which were this weekend! Somewhat embarrassingly, one of those losses was to Baron Blade, of all people :P. At least he didn't manage to crash the Moon - instead he ended up getting out two Backlash Fields (while the environment got out an Obsidian Field as well), meaning a total of eight retaliation damage :P. The only hope we had of getting rid of any of it was if Wraith turned up a Grappling Hook (the other heroes in play were Legacy and Haka), which unfortunately, she didn't :P.

Also, to top it off, that was our first game of the weekend and we finally got my dad to join in - I told him "Okay, we'll do Baron Blade - he's really easy to beat, and Insula Primalis is one of the easier Environments to play in so we'll go there as well...". So that was good :P. And then we got our arses kicked by Apostate a couple of games later, the first time we've ever been beaten by him :P.

Then, today, the two of us decided to finish up with the combination that always seems to work out well, with fun along the way - Akash'Bhuta in Insula Primalis, with Legacy and Ra...and my partner chose Tempest as the third hero. Lots of burning ensued (unfortunately we never managed to get the Volcanic Eruption/Flesh of the Sun God combo) and we kicked her arse in a record half an hour :D.

Yeah I managed to log two games against Citizen Dawn this weekend.

1 had Ra, Tempest, Visionary, Legacy, and AA, and we slaughtered her, probably took us sub 5 rounds

2 had AA, Bunker, Wraith, and AZ, probably the hardest fought win I've ever seen, with Smoke Bombs and AZ tanking a ton.

Interesting how the tides can turn so easily :) Love this game!

Also, I wanted to plug how we're close/over 700 games. This is AWESOME peeps, lets keep going, 1,000 would be a really awesome milestone!

Do we have enough information to extrapolate things like what heroes work well together?

not yet. Eventually, but you would need about 100 games with each combo. Since most heroes have only 100, I would say in about 6 months or so.

it would be very interesting, but low stats.

I suppose the stats for each combo will take longer to gather once Shattered Timelines come sout and there's a bigger pool of combinations to draw from. Oh well, I suppose we'll all have to play a load more games then, eh? :D

Apparently when I logged the game it accidentally duplicated it 2 extra times. If you could fix the 2 exact entry it would be good.

Got some games this weekend

2 Baron Blade Wins

2 Apostate (1 win/1 lose)

1 Aka' Win

Also would separting each month into separate tabs help organize the raw data??

Cause I think the issue is having to load all 500+ games at once.  

no, it wont really - It would actualy make the data load slower - the slowness comes from the calculations running in the background - i have most of them turned off, but i didnt put the on off switch on all of them (didnt realize how much it would make a difference) and have been too lazy to go back in and update them + lack of actual time to do so :P

Putting them on multiple pages would mean i have to adjust the formulas to look at multiple pages, which means even more formula calls which means even a bigger slow down. Its the sad restriction of the fact that is Google Sheets - its not really ment to handel thousands upon thousands of data points. (which if you take into the fact that we have 23 data pomts (25 if you count the timestamp and comments) for each entry, and almost 900 entries... yeah thats a lot of data points :P

If I get some free time this coming month ill work on putting the on/off if then switch onto the rest of the calculations, which should speed up load time for anyone looking. 

I know we're all excited to see the data, but unfortunately, it just isnt going to be that quick due to the limitations involved.

I normally just have the stat entry thing running in a different window, and carry on checking my forums and stuff while it loads each time I make an entry - I just hop back to it when I see the tab title has changed to "Thanks!" and post my next one.

its March 1st! I’ll be updating the master report tonight when I get home from work.

Okay! The March update is on the sheet! Go check it out!

Some interesting developments this month! The Chairmain has lost his top spot of the Most Dangerous villain. Excluding Promos, Matriarch has gotten a nice lead... but if you keep the promos in Cosmic Omnitron had decimated the heroes this month, surging forward into the 50% danger range!

Baron Blade has fallen down into the high 20% range, showing that as we get more games that fluke of him being super dangerous is leveling out. Poor Akashbuhuta still rounds out the bottom of the villain pile though for wins, despite being the second most villain played. Well, I guess thats a good thing - we like the earth still standing.

Heroe wise, Tempest, Legacy and Wraith remain the most popular heroes to play - and Legacy (excluding Promo, playtesting) remains the most powerful hero. Bunker has fallen to the least likely to win a game with a mere 63.29% win rate, followed by Absolute Zero at 64.32 - wraith has jumped from her bottom slot into the solid middle - the high 60's range.

A new stat was added on the Most Incapacitated column - if said hero was incapacitated, did the team still go on to win? Again, excluding Promo and Playtesting heroes, you msot certainly want Unity on your side, with a 25.45% chance that if she gets incapacitated you're still going to win the game... but not haka, with a mere 10% chance to still win the game after he goes down... Maybe that just means he's just that crucial to victory?

Rook City remains our Top Contender for most dangerous enviroment, and if you want an easy day hit up the Realm of Discord.

Cool stuff happened this month - The Self Destruct Sequence went off in Wagner Mars Base! As well as Omnitron getting his first defeate with Devices still in play.

I find it fascinating that our win % has jumped 5%. Thats a pretty serious improvement.

Also, somehow The Final Wasteland no one has played, yet its managed to beat the heroes once :)

Thanks so much for putting this together!

Grand Warlord Voss seems to have his games played column wrong. He has been defeated more than he has played. My guess is the played number didn't get updated.

Yeah these mistakes happen. When it takes you 3-4 hours to update all the stats, its amazing that more dont :P (fixing them right now before i jet off to work!)

i noticed a couple of people were putting in games with alternate Gloomweaver rules. While these rules are great, please!

lets not use them on the statistics thread. They skew the data - if half the games are played with Gloomweaver Base, and half the games with Gloomweaver Enhanced by BGG/SOTM Forum goers ... how are we going to know what his stats really mean? That will throw off any heroes involved in those fights, and any environments used as well..

Same goes for HRuled things such as the Enhanced Mr Fixer that is being put together, or some of those alternate power Expatriatte (youll notice thats why Promo Hero cards have their own data tracks - they change the nature of the hero and it should be recorded  differently!)

Thanks guys. Ill pull em out where I see em and throw em on a seperate sheet so they dont interfer with the statistics gathering, but still better not to put them in in the first place.

Sorry. Didn't think it through properly. I'll stop reporting enhanced Gloomweaver's games.

Lynkfox, can we change the part where it asks you what method you used to decide on gameplay to either include the "sentinels sidekick randomizer" or just change "spiffs randomizer" to say "randomizer" nonspecifically?  Nothing agaimst spiffs randomizer, but does it really matter which randomizer or method or randomization we use?  Or By the same logic I could just click spiffs randomizer because it ultimately doesn't matter. Just saying.

i only had spiffs on there because it is by far the most popular (Unless people are just pickign it instead of others, it has well over 250 instances) and i knew it would be.

Ill go ahead and add in Meizke's, the Sidekick app (which only has like 3 or 4 uses, btw) and the Excell Sheet Randomizer.

Actually I think the Excell Sheet Randomizer may be Mezike's Randomizer, or at least most of them are. It may have been just different people putting them in and some type it one way and others type it the other.

Yeah, I can attest that any put in by me or are under google/skype games that say "Excel randomiser" is Mezike randomiser, I just can't spell Mezike. (and I think I'm the only person who put that in)

k! Fixed it.

Also, we have 1003 data entries now. Coolbeans!

I'm a sucker for statistics. I would love to see more of the data formally analyzed.

Also I am starting to report my games with decks from the new expansion. This is cool; thanks a lot!

Speaking of the new Expansion...

The [Redacted] from the first page is gone now, as people are officially recieving their Expansions i felt it was no longer necessary

And the heroes and villains of Shattered Timelines on the Individual  Heroe Individual Villain pages are moved to their appropriate Complexities/Difficulties.

Ops... double entry, row 1055 and 1057. Help. Thanks.

got it

How often do you guys update the summary stats? I can't wait to see the implementation of all the new Shattered Timelines games! :)

The person (lynxfox) who has been gracious enough to coordinate this effort seems to be putting together summary stats at the very end/start of every calendar month

yep, monthly. It takes me about 2-3 hours to go through and update everything, and man do I -hate- data entry :P

I accidentally added a duplicate game against AB in Silver Gulch on 3/9/13.

fixed

Sorry, another duplicate entry, against Gloomweaver on 3/10/13. This time i accidentally put it in initially as XChylde17 and when I couldnt find it under XChylde I resubmitted it. Just delete the XChylde17 record. I will stop screwing this up eventually!

This evening when I tried to enter a game, I just got a blank result, so I'm not sure if I entered that same data 0, 1, or 2 times.

I'm currently having the same problem with a blank result popping up.

When I using the form to add games, I also have the tracker up too, that way I can see if a 'blank' submission actually goes through or not.

yeah theres nothing i can do about that. Its gdocs being slow and not the best. If you get a blank white page it is not entering the data - try again in a ltitle bit. 

Yeah, I get that sometimes - I click "submit" but the site just goes white for ages. Going back to the data entry page and trying again usually helps. Last night it wasn't even getting as far as the data entry page, and I just had a white screen when trying to access the page in the first place - I'm about to try again now so I can enter the data from this weekend.

i put in some more off switches on the formulas. The whole thing should load faster. Im not sure if it will be perfect,but it shoudl be a quite a bit faster

if it still doesnt seem tobe, ill go in and get the rest of them (the hard ones :P)

It's working now, thanks :). Finally uploading my stats from the weekend, which include our first ever defeat of Omnitron with devices still in play (which we then destroyed, though my character was Incapacitated in the final turn), and a total bastard of a game against the Chairman - we were doing okay and had flipped him but then the inevitable Prison Beak came out...for the first time we actually took down the Chairman before the Operative...and then got her onto ONE SODDING HP before the Thugs and stuff wiped us out. Dammit :P.

On the plis side, we kicked Citizen Dawn's arse with a minimum of fuss so that was alright :).

I did make one mistake in one of my stat entries, accidentally putting seven rounds instead of eleven for our fight against Akash'Bhuta in Insula Primalis (Legacy, Ra, Redeemer Fanatic) if that needs correcting...

fixed ameena, and added a few more off switches, and added PD Magnus mobile optimized randomizer to the selections as well


I thought this was interesting - its a little chart i found on the statistics page, showing the daily number of responses being entered since the survey oepned. Thats kinda cool

Neat. A nice upward trend.

Are those peaks weekends perhaps?

no idea. lol. Obviously the graph is very small, and very much not with a lot of inoformation. :P

It might be interesting to add a feature to Sentinels Sidekick to help people submit their game information. At the very least, it can pop up the form. I would like to be able to prepopulate what I can if possible, to make the process quick and easy. 

Are you planning to keep it in Google Docs for the forseeable future?

yeah - i know of no other way to do this outside of gdocs - i am not a programmer :P getting everything to work in gdocs was an adventure in learning excell code, let me tell you! (or bastardized version of it that gdocs use)

If someone wants to program something up that would take the data and correlate it and have it automatically add to the statistics page /with/ an import option to import the 1200 games we have currently... then please do! 

And then host it too, cause i am poor man with not enough money to host it ;P

No better way to learn than by doing =) you could build something like this using StackMob for instance. And it's free: https://www.stackmob.com

For the next version of Sidekick though I'll see about adding a way to at least present the form.

illl consider looking into it - (i dont own an idevice though, being an android man myself :P) but there may be somethign i can come up with :p (i was a computer science major before i fell into Cooking. But as a chef for almost a decade ya loose a lot of those skills ;p

Where are you a chef? What kind of chef?

i cook at a University, as the catering chef (inc harge of all catering food for the events that are put on by the uni, and often thigns like the President of the Uni's lunch if he is having a special meeting)

Fun statistic at the end of the Statistics Report about Contributors. They are color coded!

I'm glad that I'm in the green zone. LOL.

We need more contributors!

hehe yeah i did that the other day while doing some updates (such as games per day! - 16 and a half wow!) - those of you who are in the red zone... yeesh. Do you do anything but play SoTM? XD

Quick question...I foolishly realized that in games I marked as wins, I also flagged HP reduction as end game (user error - I thought it ment that the game ddent end as a result of an alt condition)...these will still be counted as wins yes?  I want to make sure fixer gets his due :)

yes - i have it in there to remove any that i miss during the calcuations. I still go through and look through them to remove them manually, b ut i also make sure the calcuations remove them

Damnit, duplicate submission

3/17/2013 15:35:45 and 3/17/2013 15:36:17

Out of curiosity for those of us playing with PnP promos can our statistic still count if we are using the original Hero's incapacitated side instead of the new one.

Yet to receive the new hero cards. So been playing with the front side of the Hero only.

that’s how they’ve been counted. I don’t think it will be that big of a deal - at most its going to be 5-10 games

for reference tho the new incaped powers are on the wiki

Am idiot. 3/20/2013 17:03:24, should be a lose not a win

fixed (as are all others mentioned before this point)

Any chance of splitting Advnace and Normal modes results?

I ask because I play exclusively in Advance mode.

that would effectively double the amount of information :P, so its unlikely that I will.

Its /possible/ mind you, and relatively straightforward (i would literally only have to copy and paste the two pages that collate the data and add a 'is advanced' tag to the search functions) but there is no way for me to do so in a mass format, meaning id litterally have to go through each Hero/Villian combination and Environment/hero Environment/Villain combination and add the tag, then double the fields in the Report

and since the only way I know of at the moment to get the info into the report is Manually (anything else I can think of slows down the Entry form so bad that it starts to time out on people)  that would also double the information i have to input each month. its already a 2-3 hour process for me to manually input the data, (and thats streamlined as best i can - i have a rather good 10key pad speed, and ive made things in order that it is very easy to go from data point to data point)

So while that information would be nice, until I find a way that is easier for me to input the data, or to do so automatically without destroying the speed at which the form loads and accepts data, it wont be likely.

Thanks for that.

And whatever you've done to it it runs a lot smoother now, thanks again.

No prob. Just wondering if that information can be effortlessly fished out.

Thanks for the hard work!

I got bored so i thought id try something funky.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqClP82b_XgZdFVreEhkOWJYcmlvcDNMbWppejh5aGc#gid=9

I made this quick page that can look up all the games that a given username has entered, and their games played with said info (of Villain Hero or Environment) and win percentage.

Its all still locked right now, as i fiddle about with the bugs, but i may unlock that page for people to mess around with on their own time.

Duplicate submission.  3/28/13, 11ish pm.  Remove the first one; I didn't get my name onto it.  

fixed

Anyone else excited for April 1st? 

Big thank you to Lynkfox for making the start of each month interesting. 

No Update on April 1st … youll have to wait till next month. << >>

<< >>
 

Happy early april fools day

This updated stat tracking is amazing.  Thank you so much, sir!

Personal Stat Tracking is great.

Thanks for that update :)

thanks for the appreciation. I just wanted to see if i had actually beaten La Capitan, and this was the easiest way to search - well i did just one first, then realized it be cool to do it for all my games... then realized others would want too... then realized it be a pain if i had to change it and bring it up for people...

lol.

so yes, if you don't read the sticky in the main forum, the personal stat looking up is open to anyone now. I will probably expand it a bit to show Advanced games, and average difficulty entered, rounds entered, ect. When im not feeling like the arse end of nowhere...

I made a mistake again, row 1846 the game against the Ennead in the Time Cataclysm is actaully supposed to be a win and not a loss.

You know, there are two kinds of things statistics can be used for in science, to determine correlation between events and to determine causality.  What we're doing here is determining correlation.  We know that Legacy is involved in the majority of wins, but we don't know if Legacy causes or is even a major contributing factor to the wins.  To determine that, we'd need to run experiments.  We'd need to run a number of games using the same heroes/villains/environments and then run the same games with one hero swapped out and observe the results.  Where are all the science students out there yearning to set up hundreds of controlled experiments so that we can actually say to ourselves, "this isn't just related to that somehow, this CAUSED that"?

Seems to me that you would have an additional problem: the randomization of the cards. You'd either need to run each game several times before you ever switch out or set up a villain who will take a long time (thereby increasing the chance that everyone would run through at least half of their deck).

I think what we’re dealing g with here (and I could be wrong I stuck at math) is the law of large nimbers. that even with all the random factors involved with playing a game of sotm, eventually its all going to average out and we’ll get some sort of information that is palpable to understand. that is with enough games, yes it will become evident that having legacy in your party is more likely to win you the game in general.

Is having Legacy in your game more likely to win you the game, or do people who have played the game longer and are therefore more experienced, more likely to choose Legacy for their games, winning because of their experience, not because of Legacy?  Correlative data like we have can't answer that question, but a designed experiment could.

It's the same with the Advanced mode wins -- a surprisingly high percentage of those games are wins, but that's most likely because only people who are very experienced even play Advanced mode.  If you designed an experiment that took a randomly selected group of players (so, a mix of experience levels) and had half play Normal mode and half play Advanced, I think the data would show a drastically reduced win percentage for Advanced mode.  But without the designed experiment to remove the factor of experience from the equation, you can never be sure.

Of course, if I cared that much, I'd design and run the experiments myself... ;)

I still think it comes down to the Law of Large Numbers Spiff - even with what your saying, i understand, but given a signifigantly large enough of data points, it will all average out in the end. This is a very important law of statistics, from what (little) i understand. Over enough data things like player experience, heroes paired with, and other factors wont matter because there is enough data that the 'random ness' finally results in an average.

of course were talking 1000's of datapoints per entry and were barely in the 100-200 range for most of them, far less than that for many, so its a long point before where get there, and while were working, your points are still extremely valid in dealing with these numbers

Spiff is talking about systematic errors. Statistical errors are saved by large numbers, but in a academic study you always need to consider systematic errors. Now with large numbers you can at least estimate our bias.

For example, one would think that experience would improve play skill. If all the players inputing data were more expierenced than their win percentage should be higher than the win percentage of new players. 

You could attempt to measure this bias using the data in a variety of ways. One way is to look at how an average inputees win% increases on a month by month basis. If we spot a trend then we could modify the data by the inputees time inputing data. 

In general there could be thousands of varieties of bias. Most will be really small, does win % drop on Friday do to drinking while playing for example? 

There is one bias we will never be able to test: do people who input data play differently then people who don't.

To test this we would need the field studies spiff suggests. Personally I think the effect of this is small. I play with my 7 year old, we often lose because of poor play. I included data from games with a lot of newbies, and games were I play solo. I think the variety of entries will balance most of the bias, but to be sure we would have to check.

Perhaps people doing demos could input their results? Perhaps with some sort of marker for that in the data? 

Personally I think overall systematic errors will be small, but I could be wrong.

As an aside, it would be interesting to see how solo games compare with group games.  How much more do you win when you're the only one you have to argue strategy with?

I added last night a # o players optional field

That's going to be exciting to start tracking, I wonder how many of my games make up the solo player market? Guess we'll be finding out soon enough!

I was excited to see the # of players option as well. I think all but two of my games have been solo and I was wondering if that would make a difference

You added a new thing and I got confused :(

4/3/2013 16:18:25

4/3/2013 19:19:48

The second entry is correct, I accidentally submited it as 2 players, not 2 difficulty, please delete the first entry

I feel bad about not entering all of the games I play at cons, but there is JUST NO WAY. It is SO MANY GAMES all back to back to back to back. 

Well, just keep a pad of paper with you and write it down as soon as it happens! Yeah, you're right. That's possible, BUT at a con I am often busily moving into spiel about the company and products and thinking about who is going to sit down next and getting the cards and tokens organized and ready for the next group.

So, a proposal -- if you are going to be at a con and are not already busy doing other things, feel free to volunteer to be stats secretary -- going around amongst the tables and recording the results. This would be at more than just the booth, mind you, as there can easily be many, many games going on in free play areas (or in lobbies of hotels, etc.)

Another thought is that the >G staff could set up some sort of a kiosk in the booth where people could record their games, but a note of caution on this -- there usually is neither power nor wifi available at the booth, so they are relying on re-charging devices and (perhaps costly) cellular data.

How useful are stats from people playing at cons, though?  Those games will be from people who barely know the game or the rules and who may not have even decided if they like the game or not.  I don't think we're losing much by not including those games.

Fixed

And Re: Cons - Yeah. I dont expect its going to be that easy. Im already working Origins, and id much more rather be teaching than secretariing ill write down a few for the sake of doing it but I doubt ill get all of them

How about offering Sentinels Points for people to come to the booth and register their game by filling up a hardcopy of the form. After the con, some one can do the data entry. This avoids the computer/wifi problem. And encourages players to contribute to the stats.

Sentinels points – would certainly be a motivator, but I wonder if it's unnecessary motivation – getting to fill in the stats could be its own reward in a way, it's fun to fill in the form.

Data entry – uggh

As for con games not being typical, that may be much less so than it used to be, as a LOT of the games played at the con are by experienced players (who have drawn in a newbie or two) who are looking to get more Sentinels Points. There are EIGHT new promo cards, so if you want them all, you need 800 Sentinels Points. Now, you might have gotten a few hundred from buying the core and/or expansions, but even getting all of those only gives you 500 Sentinels Points.

Get the intern to do them. Unity comes to mind.

Given that its a fan based project, not official, i doubt we'll get any official support on the line, like SP or a form. Its a fun side project, but thats all it is - fan based, for fun. 

And i -hate- data entry. hatehatehatehatehate. it takes me a few days to even get around to putting in the 2-3 games we play every tuesday, cause i just hate doing more than one at a time :p

pfft, data entry is easy brain-off stuff for me. give me the lists and i'll input them. might not all get done right away but it'll get done in a semi-timely manner.

Interestingly, I just looked up the Google Game games again and it appears that Argent Adept currently has a 100% win rate on there. Of course I don't think all games have been counted, plus putting them under Google Games is a fairly new thing and everything else prior to that was put under whom ever did the statistics. It is also 13 games aswell, so I think that's fairly good. Team Leader Tachyon is shortly behind with 11 wins and being at 100% as well. Redeemer Fanatic (7), Scholar (9), and Wraith (8) all also have 100% win rate as well.

One of the most shocking things about it is that Legacy has a 58% win rate, only 7 out of 12 games has he won. Kind of interesting since the only other hero under 70% win rate is Absolute Zero at 66%. Both Abz and Abz: EW are both tied at 6 victories in 9 games.

Hey Lynkfox...could you post a link to the form that lets you check your stats on the first post of the thread?  as this gets longer its going to be harder to find your post

i cant actually do so, as the first post of this thread is not mine :P

However, i added it to the Sticky on the General Forums already.

and ive updated the Tracker (link in my sig) to have a link to the raw statistics doc as well

Alternatively, if you sign into google, and visit the page, then go to drive.google.com it will be linked there too.

Russ (Rabit) and I are considering building a form (in  something like MS Access) that could be used to collect game stats when the Internet is not easily available.

Can anyone provide a data dictionary for the game stats -- something that describes, for each collected value, what the valid values are? I am assuming that instead of, for instance, the name of each hero, a number is substituted when collected results.

Also, were we to collect such stats, what would be the easiest format to provide them in and who should we email them to (or otherwise get a file) to? Would a comma separated value (CSV) file work well?

AND, if anyone wants to build this for us, please do let us know. Ideally, we'd like to have something that we could try out as early as when Christopher is doing game days in Indiana starting Wed, Apr 17th.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqClP82b_XgZdFVreEhkOWJYcmlvcDNMbWppejh5aGc#gid=0

Thats the raw data. If you have it print out in an Excell format in that exact manner, you can email me the excel file and ill just copy and paste it into the data there, all in one big block. And it will automatically be added to the stats, for calculation into next months report.

Only one little thing - its Tempest; Freedom (with a semi colon - its a mistake in the form and i just never fixed it cause it be a pain in my butt to adjust all the formulas now :P)

if you just copy paste from whats available so that it provides the exact same values, it will work properly.

http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/958015/environment-dificulty

The above thread at BGG made it realized that this statistics project hasn't been introduced at BGG (or had it?). Maybe we could post a thread there to collect more data? Or even add the link under "More Information"? Would that be appropriate?

I submitted a thread to bgg but I don’t think it ever got posted. If someone wants to do so again feel free to!

When I first heard about the stats project, the thought struck me that putting everything into Access would make automating stats much easier, though I'm not sure how licensing and stuff works, and I don't think OpenOffice has a bona fide database product like Access. If I subscribe to Office 365, I may grab a local copy of Lynkfox's stats sheet and drop it into Access to play around.

Please feel free to! People say ‘lynkfoxs’ project but it is a community project. I just am the curator, and I just used what was easily available and free. If someone has access to something more powerful or reliable then by all means… This is why I started the Dropbox with the files to dl

I've created a new thread in BGG. http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/960297/the-best-heroes-a-statistical-community-effort

Hopefully this will bring more data to the project and reach that threshold for unbiased stats.

As a side note, will you help to thumb that thread on BGG so that it's more visible to new visitors there?

Thanks!

I think this project might be better served as a web application.  The idea of using a spreadsheet and a survey which automatically appends data to the spreadsheet is great for quickly getting an implementation set up without having to do the extra planning and development, but it appears that it's not flexible (such as inability to bulk import entries without manual involvement), and not very scalable (the fact it takes longer to post as the data gets larger seems to imply that the survey form locks the spreadsheet, downloads the entire spreadsheet, makes it's modifications, uploads the modified spreadsheet, then unlocks the spreadsheet, which would make it take longer and longer the larger the spreadsheet gets).  Also, with a web application, many things which are manual now can be automatic and on demand (such as monthly reports, weekly reports, yearly reports, per hero reports, per villain reports, etc), and things which require people modifying the actual spreadsheet (such as looking up usernames) can be done without making such modifications. Also, creating services would also allow other programs more "direct" access to the data to allow things such as offline data collection with bulk posting and offline synchronization of data.

I would love to develop such a web application, and, in fact, have already done some planning in my head.  I do not, however, have any current web hosting, and do not have the budget to purchase such web hosting.  If someone who already has some website presence is willing to donate a directory or subdomain, that would be great.  I prefer an ASP.NET + EF + SQL Server setup, but I'm not averse to something like PHP (though I haven't done any PHP work in some time) and any relational database system.  I would also likely put all development files as a GitHub project so that others might help out.  I would definately be looking for some designers to help with style and layout with CSS, as making websites look good isn't really a strong point of mine.

Well, there are two things that you have a bit wrong, Jay Man

1) I only lock the spreadsheet while I do the manual entry because that way i wont have some stats with 5000 games, some stats with 5001 games, some with 5002 games... ect you get? Now you might be right on how the Form itself works - i think its actually taking so long because i have a -ton- of calculations built into that document, which have to update everytime someone enters data - this is because of the manual entering ive been doing, but with #2 below, i can get rid of most of those. Even turned off, 150 calculations each taking half a second to go 'Nope! im off!' adds up, you know? but far faster than it having to update each actual caclcuation (most of whichi look across the entire /sheet/

2) Im working righte now on making it almost entirely automated in Excel - in that i just download the spreadsheet (takes about 20 seconds) open it up in proper excel not GDocs, wait for the calculations to update (Which it would much faster, cause there is no limit on Excel as there is online in Gdocs) and then upload the new Tracker. Take me probably 10 mins every month (or week!) once I get it all set up.

3) I am -alllllll for it-, however, the web application. As long as I still have control over the data and such, being the project curator. Its kinda my baby and I dont just want to give it up, ya know? :P But I too have no ability to host, or pay for a host. A kiddo really takes a chunk outta the paycheck.

oh, also the nice thing about the gdocs is that if I dissapear, then someone else can take it over with relative ease. If you're the sole developer on a web app, then unless we have another coder willing to volunteer their time, any problems or requests for new calculations/data entry ect would be on hold until such was found. To me thats not a big enough reason /not/ to go forward with a webapp deal, but im just puttin git out there :P

4/28/2013 6:27:28

I evidently played a game in which we won the game due to Hero Incapacitation.  (Should be a loss.   )

I collapsed into bed early last night, and have a long day at work today. But I hope to get the report updated tonight!

Woohoo, I'm excited! I played / entered kind of a ridiculous number of games last month . . .

I'm sorry guys. I didnt end up getting off work utnil id done a 14 hour day, and i have to be back at work at 6am tomorrow. My weekend is booked /full/ as well. Ill try to get to this saturday or sunday night, but no gaurantees. At the latest ill have it up by Monday night. 

Sorry for the delay, but its the end of the school year, and there is a ton of extra work going on right now!

Looks like the update was done.  Thank you for the hard work.  It looks like the individual hero/villain stats were removed.  Was this intentional?  I liked being able to delve into each villain to see the delta between regular and advanced modes and other nitty gritty details.

There is a post below.

Yes, it was intentional - That takes up a huuuuge chunk of time, and i was seeing if people really used it. Ive decided a better way is to modify the 'look up your own stats' pageon the raw data to include and work with looking up a hero or a villian. So the data that most people want - How hard a villain or environment is, how effective overall a hero is, is all there, easy to find in comparison, and after a couple days ill have the look up a hero thing done so you can look up individual stats for heroes, villians, probably even environments, with up to date right then and there info!

Please change the XChylde17 entry from 3/10/13 to just "XChylde". 

Look at how much of a difference there is between the most difficult and the second most difficult environments: 14%! Just more evidence (like we really needed it) that Rook City is an awful, awful place. I'm one for four in that hellhole.

I'm reasonably confident that Spite only having fought 11 games is a typo... especially given that he has 91 wins two columns over.

btw...

Omnitron is apparently /brutal/ on adv

Villian/Loss Against Rate

I love the Advance stats!

Game number 3087 is actually a loss, in such a habit of checking wins I must of accidently checked the wrong thing. Sorry!

5/17/2013 20:59:16

It says Ambuscade was advanced, he was not, it was only basic, but we did still win!

Oops, I think I just made a mistake in one of my entries - Mr Fixer, Unity,and Chrono Ranger versus Spite in Rook City. I think I put normal Unity instead of Golem Unity.

Played Scholar, Nightmist, Fixer, and Bunker vs Spite in Pike Industrial.  Spite got all his drugs out OMGFAST and tore us to pieces.  With 3 of us down, we fed Scholar cards to do 39 with Turn Loose, but needed another 7 to finish him off.

Tried again later with my wife.  Changed up to Visionary, Expatriette, Wraith, and Fanatic, then randomly selected Silver Gulch.  Wraith manipulated villain deck to bring out victims, the rest set up, Visionary landed a turn one Twist the Ether to nerf him good.  We got 5 victims rescued, then he flipped.  We took another turn to set up, then Visionary twiddled her thumbs while Expat unloaded, Wraith did her equipment destruction whack-a-mole, and Fanatic finished him off with Wrathful Retribution.  Glorious!

Row 3400: Melonball played the same game against Baron Blade in Silver Gulch 6 times in the row?

if they are within a few seconds of each other, i generally remove them. Ill be going through and sorting it out in the next few days when i update the report (probably on Sunday)

I just added our first two games of #SotMv to try and help out. We don't have the core set yet so for now all our entries will be expansion based games, I hope that's okay.

I notice the stats entry form has had the "game selection method" bit changed to include various other methods - this is cool, it now means I no longer have to keep typing "Rolled dice" in the "Other" box :D.

I got tired of seeing the thirteen thousand ways someone can say they used dice or they selected their heroes but had a random villian/environment. If even one letter is different the formula counts it as a different option. so I tried to reduce that

Fair enough - that's cool :).

Error in 3948 versus the Chairman-- was not in fact an Advanced game, I just mis-clicked.

In game 3951, I forgot to check the villain flip box for Advanced Baron Blade.  He flipped like a boss with 14 cards in the trash.

July 4th and family events have thrown me for a loop here. I’ll get the new stats up soon!

Looking forward to seeing the new numbers, but don't crunch your time from family events to crunch numbers.

*Sigh* Duplicate submission needing to be deleted

7/3/2013 23:21:10

7/8/2013 2:22:09 All heroes should be incapped. We lost.

A=So i'm submiting it though the questionare but I'ma gonna post here as well. I played three games yesterday

Game 1 (Me, and two kids of a friend. It's a bit of a story)

Heroes:

Wraith (Me)

Haka (Luke)

Legacy (Hanah)

Ra (was suposed to be played by their mother Sandy, but she had a phone call so I played for her)

vs

Baron Blade

at

Megaopolis

Winner: Heroes

Incaps: None

Game Notes: Legacy 's galvanize + Inspirijgn precence is always a joy. Everyone else blasted for tons of damage so Blade never really stood a chance. Hana didn't really get involved in the game, so maybe I should play as Legacy when I teach new players.

Game 2 (solo)

Young Legacy, Ra, Tempest, Wraith

vs

Grand Warlord Voss

at

Silver Gultch, 1883

Winner: Heroes

Incaps: None

Game Notes: Loving Young Legacy. She turns the Legacy deck into an actual treat, especially with a turn 1 or 2 Surge of Strength. Grand Warlord Voss actaully got two forced deploments out during said turn 1 and 2 so when the minions showed up from beyond the grave it wasn't that treatening. Silver Gultch did be mean to an extent though: turn 1 Through the time portal searching into Lost in the Past. It was handleable, but a little annoying.Sherrif Pratt also helped out so it was a shame I had to blow him up.

Game 3

Young Legacy, Ra, Fanatic, Wraith

vs

Citizen Dawn

at

Insula Primalis

Winner: Heroes

Incaps: None

Game Notes: Her first four minions where Citizens Truth, Assault, Anvil and Hammer. Thankfully, Ra was able to get Flesh of the Sun God so Anvil and the Turn 1 Citizen Summer where minor threats, and the timing couldn;t have been better because the first enviroment was the Volcanic erruption. Fanatic didn't do a lot that was helpful but she tried. Everyone else were allstars: Young Legacy is quickly becoming my favorate.

–edit: Played a fourth game today.

game 4: Solo

(heroes were selected randomly)

Visionary, Absolute Zero, Bunker, Ra

vs

Omnitron

at

Ruins of Altantis

Winner: Omnitron

Incaps: All of us

Final Blow:Start of turn Electro-Pulse Explosive, played during Omnitrons start phase via AZ's Sub-zero Atmosphere effect.

Vilian's Hp remaining:: 25

Game Notes: I wanted to go up against Omni but wanted random heroes. Omni got a turn 1 EPE. Visioary responded by plopping Wret eh mind on it to turn some of that damage towards Omnitron. Everyone did thier job but AZ and Visionary did the least in my opinion. Bunker and Ra were doing fantastic.

Um...doesn't the EPE go off during the Start phase anyway? Sub-Zero Atmosphere would have no effect on it.

Sub-Zero Atmosphere would make Omni play a card at the start of turn, which would bring down a fresh 15 damage for everyone involved if that play was EPE.

Yea, remind me never to play that card ever again.

Game 5: Two player game with my and Josh Maxfield

Ra and Haka (Josh)

Young Legacy and Absolute Zero (Me)

vs

Mad Bomber Blade

at

Ruins of Altantis

Winner: Mad Bomber Blade

Incaps: All of us

Final Blow: The Kraken.

Vilian's Hp remaining:: 24ish

Game Notes: If I ever play this game with Josh Maxfield, I must remember never to suggest any form of Blade. Because Josh has bad expereinces with blade. Blade got two of his force fields out reducing damage by 2, and his counter attack card, and we didn't have any way to nuke them until Ra went down. Eventually the death ray damage became too much and one by one, YL, Ra, AZ and Haka became dead.

And edit for another game yay!

Game 6: Solo

Team Leader Tachyon, Legacy, Ra, Tempest

vs

AdvancedBaron Blade

at

Silver Gultch, 1883

Winner: Heroes

Incaps: None

Final Blow: Three Lightspeed assults with 9 bursts, Pushing the Limits, and HUD Goggles

Heroes's Hp remaining:

 * TL Tachyon: 14

 * Legacy: 13

 * Ra: 2

 * Tempest:13

Game Notes: Every Hayes showed up, though Tyler helped out by shooting blade. The general stragety was to have Ra and Tempest do as much damage as they could while Legacy buffed, getting in when he could via One-shot. Tachyon let everyone draw into their goodies while charging up the nuke before switching to Research Grant. Baron Punching Bag had 13 or 14 cards int he bin before he flipped, and when he did, Tachyon just ownd him.

Never play that card again.

Thank you Greywind. I shall take your advice to heart.

Ohh yes, I wasn't even thinking of Omnitron's own end-of-turn card play. Duhh…oh well, Sub-Zero Atmosphere works well against some villains (eg Voss), at least…

Not Advanced Voss.

It's amazing against Apostate, though.

I've not fought anyone on Advanced so I don't know their rules (other than that Lilian's cohorts are indestructible, and that only from reading it on here somewhere). But yeah, Apostate is another one it'd be good against, especially if you then manage to take out whatever damaging relic he's played before it gets to his next turn :D.

Advanced Blade is a good place to start. Fortunelty for me I didn't get swarmed by Hasten Dooms (I don't think any showed up), so if you wanna try Advanced Baron Punching Bag is a good start.

Me and Max played another game

Game 7:Me and Josh Maxfiled

Young Legacy and Absolute Zero (me)

Tempest and Haka (Josh Maxfield)

vs

Grand Warlord Voss

at

Megaopolis

Winner: Heroes

Incaps:Tempest

Final Blow: Haka's elbow smash

Remaining HP:

*Young Legacy : 15

• Absolute Zero: 23

• Tempest: Incapastiated

• Haka: 23

Game Notes: No Forced Deployments but the TCF Stalwart did make an appearance. AZ's helaing engine was online pretty quick but without the support of dealing cold when AZ takes Fire AZ was mostly stuck at "I'm highest hit me" position. YL got a turn 1 Inspiring Precence and that was a boon. Temptest took a risk with Localized Hurricane. The +1 damage taken was pretty bad for him and he paid for it even after he got rid of it. Haka was cleanup and he did a good job. Megaopolis wasannoying but not horrendious.

edit: i played three more games that day and now I am getting around to posting the results:

Game 8 (Me, sammy, and Brian)

Legacy (Me)

Bunker (Sammy)

Wraith (Brian)

vs

Citizen Dawn (facepalm)

at

Wagner Mars Base

Winner: Citizen Dawn

Incaps:All of us

Final Blow: Citizens

Villian Remaining HP:70

Game Notes: Dear god, what was I thinking letting the new guy pick a villain? Citizen Danw had us on the ropes about halfway through the game when the Mars Base wasn't. We just couldn't handle her after she got Solar Eclipse and Return with the dawn.

Game 9: me, sammy and Brian

Team Leader Tachyon (me)

Bunker (sammy)

Fanatic (Brian)

vs

Baron Blade

at

Silver Gultch 1883

Winner: Heroes

Incaps:Team Leader Tachyon and Fanatic

Final Blow: Sustain the portal

Remaining HP:

*Bunker: 3

Game Notes:Another close one. TL Tachyon pushed the limis too much and a double Hasten Doom doomed her. Fantaic went next, but not before blasting for 19 damage becuase of that one card that does damage equal to the HP she lost. Bunker blasted with the Omnicannon powered up due to eh Explosives wagon, and JUST before Baron got to kill him, we  got sustain the Portal and killed him before we could kill us. A very close one, and the victory was earnd in my opinion. Remind me to allways go up against Baron Blade when teahing players.

game 10: Just me and sammy

Team Leader Tachyon and Ra (me)

Haka and Bunker (sammy)

vs

Omnitron

at

Silver Gultch 1883

Winner: Heroes

Incaps:None

Final Blow: Ra's base power Prye

Remaining HP: Honestly i forogt to write that down this time.

Game Notes: We got hit by the sedatives twice, but the only bad thing about it was teh damage. the second time was redirected by Tachyon, dn there were two E Wagons! No Electro grenades thankfully. 

Okay, last one. I 'm gonna move any future games to a special topic so i won't flood this one.

game 11:Solo

Team Leader Tachyon, Ra, Tempest, and Unity

vs

Advanced Omnitron

at

Ruins of Atlantis

Winner: Heroes

Incaps:None

Final Blow: Unity's Turret Bot with Champion Bot and Imbuned Fire support.

Remaining HP:

TLTachyon: 20

Ra: 19

Tempest: 19

Unity: 19

**Turret, Champion, Raptor, and Cryo were at full

Game Notes: Another game with no electro grenades. Omnitron must have put in that empathy drive already. We got really lucky as a turn 1 Imbuned Fire and Cleansing Downpour healed us. Thankfully Omni's first plays were Terraforming (HA) and the Sedatives (HA!). Omni couldn't get a grove going but the heroes could! TLTachyon is a great supporter, and dealt 27 damage off of three Lightpeed assults. The most damage was a tie between Ra and Unity, but TLTachyon was a close one as well. Tempest was mostly the medic, healing as much as he could. All in all, I think Omni is only a treat if he gets the grenades out early before the heroes set up.

I'm having problems with submission recently. After clicking submit, the page loads for a long time before it clears itself and requests my to re-enter the entire form. After I re-entered the form, the same problem persists. I have not been able to add data for the past week.

Any advice?

I too had that problem, but I did find that the formulas were turned "on" on the sheet when I was trying to submit, and that makes it take a lot longer, I turned it off and was able to submit results again.

I just checked - All the formuls are currently turned off. If  you have the web document open while trying to submit, that can sometimes lead to the problem youre descirbing. Close it out to see if that helps. If not, restart? xD

Hey all,

I love the work that's been done on capturing a bunch of games. I took a shot at putting them into a form that allows more detailed investigation than the initial reports being created. They are up to date as of July 22. I've not been able to establish a reading connection to the output google document (yet). I think it may be possible, but I've not been able to yet.

Anyway, you can see my efforts at http://public.tableausoftware.com/views/Sentinels1/Overview?:embed=y&:display_count=no which I think provide some interesting insights (enough so I'd love to see this linked to on the front page).

Some initial insights:

• The Dreamer is the worst villain for moving up in # of heroes. She's pretty easy with 3, tough against 4, and brutal against 5. No other villains comes close. The Ennead is the only other one that is harder with more players.
• Citizen Dawn is pretty even against any # of players.
• Wagner Mars Base, in particular, seems different depending on the villain. Seems easy for the heroes to beat the Ennead there but much harder for Mad Bomber Baron Blade.
• The previous observation, particularly, but many others, are very limited by sample size. MORE GAMES, PLEASE!
• There may be some "good" and "bad", statistically, match-ups for heroes and villains, but, again, sample size. Some interesting data, at least.
• Picking heroes vs. choosing randomly didn't have as big an impact as I expected. On the order of 2-10%.

I'm sure lots more people can discover more, if they are interested.

Arathorn

(Edit: Fixed link)

*Sigh*

it's obviously been too long since I submitted any statistics, as I submitted the same one twice (again)

7/30/2013 8:58:28

7/30/2013 9:00:30

The first one is wrong this time.

Is there any update for Aug? I can't find it...

I updated with games through this morning. Same link. I included all the two-player games, too. I didn't do any data corrections, so multiples may exist. 

I'm not having any luck getting a real-time connection to the google document. Google's API for accessing things is ... not as robust and complete as I'd like. It might be possible to set up a side SQL database and sync them all the time, but I'm not quite sure I have all the resources necessary to do something like that. If someone else is interested in doing this, I'm willing to help and provide ideas. It seems like it involves setting up something like Thunderbird with an account subscribed to changes in the document and then automatically downloading the new document and putting it into a SQL DB.

Let me know with other requests for reports.

Arathorn

Sorry! WOrk is hectic and life is busy. See the other thread for my personal life update. :\

Would anyone mind if I used the statistics in an analytics competition for a college class?  We get to use some Enterprise Resource Planning software (SAP for those who know) and we get to play with their graphic analytics package.  This would be an epic data set to use and hopefully it could churn out some neat infographics to post here!

I've submitted my first four games, all but one of which were genuine (I play a lot of solitaire, which I figure mostly counts).  For my next (also solo) game, I have a question.  Should I count a hero as Incapacitated only if they literally lost all their HP, or can they also be counted so if they were completely neutered by in-game effects, so that they literally couldn't accomplish anything?  This applies to Tachyon, and to a lesser extent Ra (who could poke for 1 damage as his entire turn), because both had empty hands due to Citizen Tears and couldn't keep an Ongoing on the table due to Citizen Sweat, while Citizen Anvil negated many sources of damage, so it was functionally impossible for either to accomplish anything.  (Had Tachyon drawn a Hypersonic Assault, of course, it would have been a different story, but she never did.)

Incapacitated refers strictly to a hero being forced to flip to their incapacitated side.

Had Tachyon drawn a Hypersonic Assault, she'd've been no better off if Anvil was in play since her damage (and therefore the damage-nerfing effect of the card) would still have been blocked ;)

Maybe I named the wrong card.  I meant the one that deals X damage where X is your Bursts in trash.

That would be Lightspeed Barrage.

I always get confused by this question on the form:

"In what manner did the game end? (For anytime the game ends where it is not by the Villain reaching 0 HP) Enter: Incapacitated if every hero was taken out, or a cards alternate loss - such as TerraLunar Beam, or Self Destruct Sequence. Or if you defeated Gloomweaver by removing his relics. These are manners in which the game ended that is unique and not necessarily regarding HP=0

• HP Incapacitation (Heroes)
• Relic Victory (Gloomweaver)
• Terra Lunar Impulsion Beam (Baron Blade)
• Minion Overrun (Voss)
• Omnitron's Devices After Omnitron died
• Did Not Protect Her (The Dreamer)
• Mars Base Explosion (Wagner)
• Time Portal Closed (Silver Gulch 1883 )
• Heroes Conceded"

I fought Gloomweaver for the first time today, and we beat him by taking out his Relics...which I think means that I was supposed to pick the second option here, which I did.  But this is a little weird, because that's the ONLY case where I input anything on this question in a game where the heroes didn't lose.  Normally, when we win, none of these apply.  It just seems a bit strange to have one option here that applies to victory, when all the others apply to defeat.

Y ou mean two options. "Omnitron's devices after omnitron died" is a victory cnonfition

I assumed that this one meant "Omnitron's devices killed you after Omnitron died".

That would be regular hp incapacitation

While looking at the statistics, I found that there are currently 17 games input as "Google Games" instead of "Google Game", I was wonder if there would be a way to have it changed? It appears the Skype Games are ours aswell... I blame Matchstickman!

Thanks in advance.

But it fails to distinguish whether your loss was caused by Omnitron himself, or if you succeeded in beating him but succumbed to his devices afterward (an unlikely outcome I suspect, but still).  After all, it's not possible to win the game without destroying any Devices which survive after Omnitron, so why would you need to track that?  Conversely, though, games in which the Devices survived would be quite noteworthy.

This brings up a rules question…if you succeed in destroying Omnitron on Advanced Mode, would his "devices take less/deal more damage" abilities no longer apply?  This is the only circumstance I know of in which a villain character card can leave play, so it bears clarifying whether the Advanced text is actually attached to the villain, or if it's a "floating meta-rule" which is overwritten each time the villain flips but never actually ends otherwise.

Anyway, I still think it's weird to have one question saying "Did you Win?" and another one that doesn't ask "If not, how did you lose" but rather "if the game ended in any way other than one particular way for you to win, how did the game end?"  I feel like if that question is to cover both victories and defeats, then it should have a radio button for the most common victory condition, "Villain reduced to 0 HP"; having that be assumed as the default answer, when it is far and away the most common scenario for games you win, seems to strongly imply that the question only pertains to games you lose.

The Advanced Rules are printed on Omnitron's card, thus only applies when Omnitron is in play.

pppery is right, that is supposed to be for when you kill Omnitron, but the game keeps going until you kill his devices. And you were correct about Gloomweaver - its one of the two Win conditions in there. the question is alternate wins other than (HP=0) of some cards.

im giving control of the form over to Arathorn today, maybe he can change the google games /game bit?

I may have asked this already, but if not I'll ask again.  Do you click that a hero was Incapacitated if they were only incapacitated at the very end of the game (say, within one villain or environment turn)?  For instance, in today's game, all four heroes eventually died (as is generally implied by "Did you win? No" and "HP incapacitation of heroes"), but Wraith and Fanatic went down several turns before the game end, while Haka and Zero fought it out.  This seems like it ought to be denoted somehow.

By the way, if you would really like to know how many rounds my first game against Citizen Dawn and my second game against baron Blade went, I can figure it out.  I don't think either one of us wants to do the extra work, but I just thought I'd mention that the data exists, and I'll go to the effort of figuring it out if you want to go to the effort of editing it into the record.  If not, s'cool.

Since I haven't gotten my answer, I'm going to go ahead and input my last game on the assumption that you DON'T select Incap for heroes that didn't die until the very end.  This might stand out in the statistics as being weird later; if so, that'll make it easier to fix.

I would select Incapacitated for all heroes that die, regardless of when it happens.  That will make statistics easier to do.  Otherwise, you have to decide what exactly constitutes "the very end".

If there were a more detailed form, it might ask when each hero died.  But with the form as it stands, I don't think you can distinguish.

Okay, I'll go with that dpt.

And I'm sorry Lynxfox, I know you have said several times that we should trust that the program is working and not multi-submit...but in this case, it's sat with a blank progress bar for well over 15 minutes, so I'm just going to have to assume it has failed.

PS, you and arenson both said you don't like data entry, so I just thought I'd take a moment to mention that it's what I do for a living.  I don't know if it's logistically possible for me to help you in any way, but I might be able to consider it.

EDIT - Okay, the second time it went through, but only to a blank page.  I won't attempt to enter it a third time, but please check whether you received one or two inputs that match the following.

Villain:  Grand Warlord Voss

Advanced: Yes

Hero 1:  Wraith

Incap1:  Yes

Hero 2:  Fanatic

Incap2:  Yes

Hero 3:  Haka

Incap3:  No (only in input 1)

Hero 4:  Absolute Zero

Incap4:  No (only in input 1)

Villain Flip:  Yes

Heroes Won?:  No

Game ended:  Heroes reduced to 0 HP.

Game time:  60-90 minutes (actually it was a lot more than that due to distractions, this is a guesstimate of how long it would have taken if I were completely focused on playing)

Difficulty:  5

Rounds:  7

Player:  Envisioner Will

Comments:  First-turn End of Days made the game seem like it would be easy, but round-4 Forced Deployment fixed that in a hurry.  Wraith died on round 5, Fanatic on round 6, and the boys on round 7.  For laughs I played out a what-if scenario where they survived due to a Meteor Storm, but Voss still had overrun potential, so they couldn't spare time to heal much before ending the Storm, and in the end they still died.

Hi Arathorn,

When I looked at your statistics, under Heroes, why are the percentages not properly sorted? For example, Rook City Wraith has 68.21% but is ranked higher than Mr Fixer 68.65%?

Still need confirmation of whether my game was entered (once or more), and then I have a new game to input.  However, I accidentally mis-played in a somewhat significant way...I had an Assault Drone deal damage to everything in play, instead of just to one target, and this resulted in the death of Tachyon, whose Incap power to play a card out of turn was insanely powerful with Unity's golems, although some of those also died in the same error, so it's possible things would have evened out over the length of the (very prolonged and grindy) game.  Should I go ahead and enter the game in spite of the error?

You can check yourself, look on the raw input page, linked on the first page of this thread

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqClP82b_XgZdFVreEhkOWJYcmlvcDNMbWppejh5aGc#gid=0

I was not successful in being able to read that.  It looks like it's ever game ever entered, and it doesn't show usernames, so I have no hope of being able to find my game.

Yep, all the data ever.

It does list your username and you can find it, you can use Ctrl F like a webpage or search via the edit menu, I recommend Ctrl F so as to not accidentally mess things up (though I think that page is locked).

You could also try looking at the approximate time you submitted your result and seeing if it's there

EDIT: If I am entering data then I generally have that page open as well as the submission form, that way I can see if my game does go in or not; just scroll to teh bottom of the list and see if anything is being added.

Go look again.  Sheet 1, which is the only one of the sheets I can even begin to read (except for the final sheet, "Enter your Username here", which doesn't seem to do anything), does NOT have a username column.

and you can find it, you can use Ctrl F

This confirmed that the word "Envisioner" appears nowhere on Sheet 1.

Funny, I find 12 on that page, in column Z, try scrolling?

Envisioner, your first game appears to be at row 4976.  Google Docs doesn't load all the rows at once, so Ctrl-F doesn't find it initially.

Ah, I didn't realize that the columns went up to Z.  I assumed that when I stopped seeing vertical divisions, the sheet had gotten to the "infinite blankness beyond this point" stage, which in functional terms means the end.

Okay, I found my game, and it is indeed a singular entry.  It's the one in which I had listed Haka and Zero as not having been incapacitated, even though they were so at the end of the game (since, alternate victories aside, this is always how the game DOES end when the heroes lose).  If you feel the need to change that, go right ahead; if it's up to me, I'm satisfied with my logic.  I'll go ahead and put in my more recent game now.

1) If a hero dies, at anypoint, you put Incapactiated. The hero was taken out of the game. this is to try and give a 'rough' (VERY ROUGH) idea of how effective Incapaciated sides are. some may be more helpful than others. And of course, if you lost by HP Loss, then you should put incapaciated because the form is simple, and does not have dictative logic. When i was keeping up the sheet, i went back through and found any Heroe's conceaded and put them as incapaciated too. But thats another story

2) Your username is there, as you found - all the data from the form is there. That is how it works.

3) The last page, Enter your User Name here, affects the page right before it. It will bring up your personal stats for your username (as long as you always use the same spelling and space assocation with your username) - you put in your user name, then switch the drop down box to On, then go look at the page right before it. When it loads, it will show your information.

4) The document loads /very/ slowly now. This is a limitation of Gdocs, and nothing can be done about it. It has to parse all the information through the forumlas, to realize the formulas are off (which speeds it up thankfully) and then display it back to you - this can and does take several minutes.

5) With my RL being so crazy hectic, if you have questions, you can send me a PM on the forum - its a much more likely way of me getting a question and answering it quicker than me finding the posts in 

That logic seems to contradict itself.  If the hero wasn't incapped until game end, then the incap side had no opportunity to be effective

It's also useful to know who the least likely to fall down (at all) in a given fight is. Haka went down? Things probably look bad, there's not a good win percentage with Haka incapped. There's lots of info that you can glean from it, even if it's not perfect info it seems preferable to have the hard rule than to have everyone only put incapped when the feel like it was "really" an incap. 

Couldn't the data simply calculate a "did you win? no" result as counting as all heroes incapped for statistical purposes (unless it was an alternate loss condition), but leave their actual incap-field status dependent on whether the character actually took one or more Incap turns?  (It would count if they took a turn-skip, but not if the game ended before getting back to their turn.  In the vast majority of cases, the latter would only happen as a result of all heroes dying in a single Villain or Environment turn.)  That way, you could just look at the incap fields and you'd know which characters bit the dust, but still continued to influence the outcome of the game, without also registering those who stood proud and tall up until the final blow.

No, because there are cases where heroes lose but are not incapped, as you yourself point out. It would be more work to program in on an already stretched project.

If you can make your own page to collect information that is superior to the current one then I'm sure the current data can be imported.

As to who was incapped when, I originally asked for the incap field to know who was incapped, I did not care when or how effective they are after incap, I was just interested in how many games were won with heroes incapped (mine were all or nothing style incaps so I was curious as to others' results).

with over 5000 games now, its a little late for changing what data we collect.

Also, for a 'Did you win, no' as all incaped: Baron Blade - he can win without everyone becoming incapped. So can other villains (the Dreamer for instance) - so it makes a difference. And the limitations of the system we're using do not allow us to connect easily 'Terra Luna Impulsion' losses with setting heroes not incapped/incapped for stat purposes. I choose to be far more generalistic in the manner. 

So we picke din the end - if a hero flips, at any point, mark them as incapped

There may have been a better way to do it. there may have been a more effecient way. At the moment, this is what we have :)

Yes, but those cases are always explicitly called out.  It's just a simple switch; when "All heroes reduced to 0 HP" is clicked on, any "Hero incapacitated: no" results are ignored.  One extra line of code written in somewhere, in order to remove an ambiguity and enable the collection of a VERY relevant data point.

If you can make your own page to collect information that is superior to the current one then I'm sure the current data can be imported.

I would be happy to do exactly that, if only I knew how.

As to who was incapped when, I originally asked for the incap field to know who was incapped, I did not care when or how effective they are after incap, I was just interested in how many games were won with heroes incapped (mine were all or nothing style incaps so I was curious as to others' results).

Okay, so if it doesn't matter which heroes died first in games that are lost, then the input form could say so, and I wouldn't have to wrack my brain wondering about how to interpret it.  (I admit, I'm being a little disproportionate in my pique over this issue, but I always have that reaction to ambiguous "paperwork".  My mentality is that of the computer programmer, even though I lack the skill; to my way of thinking, everything must be explicit, and anything with vague or incomplete instructions is simply impossible to proceed with.  I don't have much in the way of heuristics programming.)

But you've already made at least one change; some of the old data lists Advanced Mode results of "Yes, Side A", and it's impossible to enter that on the main form (it only says "No" or "Yes, both sides").  So there's data from an obsolete form already in the base; I don't see any reason that can't happen again.

Also, for a 'Did you win, no' as all incaped: Baron Blade - he can win without everyone becoming incapped.

sigh Yes, I know that.  There's a radio button for him, and another for Voss and one for the Dreamer and one for the Wagner Marsbase and so forth.  UNLESS one of those is clicked, "all heroes lost" inevitably means "all heroes were incapacitated", so clicking any number of incap boxes would be irrelevant if the objective was to measure whether the heroes had EVER died, because by definition they must have.  Thusly, the "did you win and how" questions ought to come first, and selecting "heroes lost to HP incapacitation" should gray out all the incap checkboxes.  Unless the point of those boxes is not to find out whether the hero EVER died, which we already know they did, but to find out whether they died SOONER than other heroes who had better staying power.  That's useful info.

And the limitations of the system we're using do not allow us to connect easily 'Terra Luna Impulsion' losses with setting heroes not incapped/incapped for stat purposes.

Hrm.  Well I find it impossible to picture how that could be true, but then my programming knowledge is pretty minimal, so I guess I have to take your word for it.

So we picke din the end - if a hero flips, at any point, mark them as incapped There may have been a better way to do it. there may have been a more effecient way. At the moment, this is what we have

Can the bolded line (or words to that effect) at least be added to the input form for the sake of clarity?  If I found it unclear, so could someone else, and you'd have to go through this whole conversation over again.

This is … kinda possible. But honestly, far more work than I want to put into it, plus another formula of this nature would slow the document down even more than it already is. It isn't worth it in my opnion. These stats were for fun, never ment to be anything more than an interesting thing to look at and view - even with 5000 some games, we still have around a 5% error rate for the best and most popular entries - those with less than 100 data points are still 25% or higher error rates, and so mean … well pretty much nothing as far as statistcs go.  Its for fun.

There is a difference - that was removing a data point, not adding one. That was also back with only a couple hundred entries. very different. At this point, any new data point entered would be very off - 5000 some entries is finally getting us down to a <5% error rate in most situations - a new data point will not have the information from all these previous entries, and be very off kilter from the rest of the data points - ie, it would not be accurate. Yes, i could add to the form. Yes, people could start entering it. the data would be inaccurate and incorrect.

You answered your own response here. It simply, unfortunately, does not work like that. In a more extensive system, it certainly could yes. Gdocs is not an extensive system. We are already pushing its limits with what we do right now. 

well, in 5000 some entries your the first, but if I have the time I can.

I meant to include a bit more info in my Comments for the game I just played against La Capitan, to make sure it's clear that I didn't fail to account for her healing and damage prevention.  Here's what I put in:

La Capitan less deadly than usual; never drew Plunder, only one Raiding Party, only one Temporal Thief, two All Together Nows both predated destruction of the ship. Fanatic used End of Days to remove all the crew, enabling Bunker to draw five cards with Ammo Drop, and then dealt 25 damage with Wrathful Retribution before dying. Cappy at 6 HP when she finally flipped, but was torn apart by Turret Mode Bunker and double-Brainstorming Unity with a good Golem setup in the following round; Omnitron dealt the final blow with Singularity for 6.

Here's what I'd like it to say instead:

La Capitan less deadly than usual; never drew Plunder, only one Raiding Party, only one Temporal Thief, two All Together Nows both predated destruction of the ship. Fanatic used End of Days to remove all the crew, enabling Bunker to draw five cards with Ammo Drop, and then dealt 25 damage with Wrathful Retribution before dying. Cappy at 6 HP when she finally flipped (6 stolen cards due to TemThief), but was torn apart by Turret Mode Bunker and double-Brainstorming Unity with a good Golem setup in the following round; Omnitron dealt the final blow with Singularity for 6 after his components dealt 3.

Looks as if my entry of about 20 minutes ago did not go into the database, so I'm entering again.  Apologies if there's a redundancy which you end up having to remove, but I think I've waited long enough that it should have shown by now.

Tempest, Scholar, Legacy, Haka and Chrono-Ranger defeated Advanced Baron Blade in the Wagner Mars Base (player choice); no incapacitations.  Game took 4 rounds, approximately 30 minutes or less (maybe slightly more, but then I'm playing solo here, effective time would easily have been under a half hour with more hands to juggle the HP tokens and shuffle simultaneously and such).  Difficulty 2.

Comments:  In his Advanced version, Baron Blade feels just barely like a credible threat; the 5-turn clock to get his main version destroyed did make me sweat, but with some of the most powerful and aggressive heroes in the game (notably Tempest with his Shackles and a Lightning Storm, Legacy with Inspiring Presence and Galvanize, and Scholar allowing a double-Galvanize salvo with Proverbs and Axioms), Blade's HP disappeared fast, and he didn't luck into a new Weapons Platform to delay his demise (Living Force Field only barely helped, and CR could have destroyed it with a Temporal Grenade if it were ever worth bothering).  The heroes were being extremely aggressive, taking +2 damage from Haka's Rampage when Blade was the only target, and even +3 damage for the last two heroes during Proverbs and Axioms, but Blade never managed to capitalize on their dwindling HP totals with any of his nasty attacks.  Wagner Mars Base was a virtual nonentity, with a first-turn Oxygen Leak dealing a grand total of 1 damage to each hero and neutralizing a Fire in the Biosphere.

*******

Also, what's this about 2-hero games?  How do those work?

Whenever anyone is maintaining the database again, attention:  Lines 5080-5082 are identical.

Hi Arathorn,

When I looked at your statistics, under Heroes, why are the percentages not properly sorted? For example, Rook City Wraith has 68.21% but is ranked higher than Mr Fixer 68.65%?

Well, I'm not sure. It shouldn't be that way. I've been meaning to look into it.

I'm also hoping to get into editing the actual lines. Lynkfox did everything on his end -- I'm the slacker.

Arathorn

I will be checking tomorrow to see whether the following game entry was successfully inputted.  (EDIT:  It was.)

Vs. Iron Legacy (not advanced) in The Block - Tempest (incap), Scholar, Fanatic (incap), villain did not flip, heroes conceded, difficulty 3, 12 rounds.

Comment: IL opened on no defenses and took a healthy amount of damage, but then Final Evolution immunized him against the damaging powers and bought him time to get out Armored Fortitude.  The game ended with him and an invincible Scholar (thanks to Tempest recycling Expect the Worst) just glaring with each other, knowing that Scholar would eventually "blink" by reshuffling his deck, and could never possibly remove IL's Ongoings in order to hurt him.

Once I've confirmed that this entry posted, I will add the following additional reports for the same day's games.  (EDIT:  I did.)

Vs. Grand Warlord Voss (advanced) in Pike Industries - Expatriette (incap), Mr. Fixer (incap), Argent Adept (incap), villain flipped, all heroes killed, difficulty 2, 4 rounds.

Comment:  Pike Industries decided to be evil this game, and did at least as much damage to the heroes as Voss's minions did, even without Rats or a Checmical Explosion.  The heroes easily killed Voss's minions, but then they were irradiated and supercooled to death, one barely surviving long enough for a lonely Voss to finish off personally.

Vs. La Capitan (not advanced) in Atlantis - Absolute Zero (incap), Omnitron-X (incap), Tachyon (incap), villain flipped, all heroes killed, difficulty 5, 7 rounds.

Comment:  Atlantis utterly hated me this match.  Cappy flipped on turn 1, the heroes stripped all but one of her stolen cards, they sunk the ship and killed most of the crew - apparently they were winning, and then two rounds of Atlantis giving her three extra card plays, one of which was Mable and another one brought back the Ship, for a total of five extra cards including a Raiding Party and several Temporal Thieves - Cappy went from lonely and defenseless to untouchable in just six game turns, and a Leaking Room clinched the heroes' uselessness.  O-X held out the longest with Ablative Coating, but couldn't hope to do more than kill a Crew or two before he was whittled away to nothing.

Well, while I don't have the time to really update the statistics, I did go through and update the form for Vengeance and the Dark Watch Promo's. 

Of course Vengeance complicates things quite very much. 

Very much

But such is the life of this project.

I removed all the formula's from the data, except the individual look up formulas (which have NOT been updated for Vengeance yet, be aware) that should help move things along a little bit.

Google Spreadsheets is also updating to be faster, stronger better - but sheet protections are not in yet. So i am not willing to put it up yet into the new format - because tampering is a real concern and breaking the form by too many people playing around is a possiblity.

So anyways there is that. Arathorns update isnt as often as would be awesome, but at the very least, the stats are getting collected. When someone *cough paul? cough xD kidding!* has time to put up a real SQL and API and what not stuff that be great, but at least until then the stats are being collected. :)

The new form entry is not terminating at a readable page.  It used to give you a "Successfully submitted" message and a link to potentially make another entry.  Now it's just dumping you onto a blank page and no indication that the entry was successful.

Something that would also be useful is for the termination page to have a link directly back into the forums instead of requiring the user to backpage back through the entry or use their own saved link.

weird It was giving me a proper termination on the times I tried it out. I can't make it give you a link back to the forums, unfortunately - that just isnt in the cards for what GDocs allows, but ill look into the other issue.

Edit: Just tried to do it, and it gavem e a proper response - Your Response has been submited, Submit another Response?

Its likely its a problem with Gdocs and your browser, and thats something /way/ beyond my ability to help with. If it persists try in a different browser, and if its still not working, all I can do is suggest you contact google support :/

Anyone else having this problem?

The last 3 or 4 days I was getting an error when I tried submitting games. I believe pwatson also had an issue when trying to submit some games as well.

Any idea what the error is? I see games getting submitted, and Am able to do so just fine myself.

And I have your Dark Watch trial game on the 19th Ronway ... hmmm

Well look at that, it appears to be all cleared up now. Just sent a game in under the username "Testing" which is number 5964, so feel free to delete that because it isn't a real game. Oh well, it's only missing about 10-15 games from Google Game, so it's all good!

Yeah im thinking its mostly gdocs. Im lookingforward to the new expanded and better coded spreadsheets - or when someone has the knowledge, knowhow, and time to do this custom like :o

While the multi-page input form is a little annoying, I'm gratified to see that you've apparently eliminated most of the delay for the form to accept inputs.

Under "what method did you use to select the gameplay", what's with the new "Earn Achievement" option?  Is that just stuff like the Living Sentinels Campaign and the events Pydro's been running, or is it more official than that?

Not sure of this is what it is referring too, but there are official challenges.

Yeah, its picking up a team specifically to try to achieve one of the achievements that havent been updated since the first edition

If others are finding the multi page annoying, i can remove it. Just figured it would be easier than having to click through a forum a mile long, but I can pull it down if need be.

I like that Vengeance has its own page that can be easily skipped through, but it leaves the first page rather sparse.  Would it possible to combine the first page with one of the others, or does everything have to be listed in the order it appears on the spreadsheet?

Nah, nothing on order matters. It can all be rearanged as need be.

Sorry if it's been mentioned. But for "In what manner did the game end", should there be an option for Promo-Gloomweaver/Skinwalker eating himself? Potentially he can take himself out with his own flip-side damage...

Ill add that in a bit - didnt realize that Skinwalker had that as a possiblity when I updeated it.

For that matter, when you win against The Dreamer, there should be a "Did Protect Her" option.

(And I still think the incap checkboxes for heroes ought to be able to distinguish whether the hero had incap turns or died in the final round.)

If you win against hte Dreamer it is a standard win. There is only one way to win against the dreamer, and that is to protect her.

If you loose against the dreamer, however, there are two ways. She dies, or your heroes are all incapped. Which is why there is an option. If you dont select the option, then a loss against The Dreamer is automatically Heroes Incapped.

If you win against the Dreamer, then it is automatically protect her. There is no other win condition possible.

And for the sake of simplicity, nope on the incaps. 

"How did the game end?  For any game where it is in a way other than the villain reaching 0 HP."

Don't look at me, I didn't write it.

And for the sake of simplicity, nope on the incaps.

Fair enough.  Maybe one day I'll figure out how to make my own spreadsheet so that part can be tested.

I wrote a script to see how the various heroes and villians are impacted by the player count (as I didn't see that done elsewhere - may have missed it) - see attached. Interestingly, some villians get much easier (with my metric - Omnitron, The Chairman, Plague Rat, The Matriarch, Iron Legacy, Voss) with more players, some stay about the same (Spite, Akashbhuta, Apostate, Dawn, Kismet), and The Dreamer gets much harder (and is actually the hardest 5p villain). I think this is mostly due to the extent of H icon usage and/or group vs individual attacks.

Similarly, some heroes get much better in larger groups (again by my metric - Visionary, Bunker, Tempest, Legacy, Wraith, Fixer) some get just a bit better (Haka, Chrono, Argent Adept) and some stay about the same (Absolute Zero, Nightmist, Omnitron-X). I think utility like villian deck manipulation and Legacy's base power gets better with larger groups, and heroes that have basically their own game plan seem to be just as good in 3P as in 5P. Some of the results for the heroes surprise me - I would have guessed Absolute Zero would add more to bigger teams b/c he gains so much when his damage is pumped.

The metric I used is a combination of percentage gained and percentage gained as a function of how much could be gained. So going from 40% to 60% win rate is a lot, but going from 60% to 80% is worth more.

Sentinals_Stats_2014-02-12_0.xls (39.5 KB)

Did your metric measure Miss Information?  She should definitely come out to be harder for higher H values.  Not quite as much of a no-brainer as the Dreamer (where you have to kill Hx2 targets and deal with H-1 card players per turn after losing H cards in play), but still noteworthy for how long you're stuck with nothing to attack in a high-H game, and how severe her constant psychic damage is after the flip.

Curious that you don't read Omnitron-X as being significantly stronger in groups with more heroes, since he's supposed to be powered by empathy....

The extra card play and 3 target healing cap naturally causes the overall gain to diminish when the number of heroes increase.

Adept does that a bit too, but since he doesn't add toughness or much damage you need bigger groups to offset that.

It does look like Miss Information is a bit harder with 4 than with 3. There were not enough games logged of her against 5 players yet to really say, but I bet you will end up being right.

Unless she gets extra villain plays from something (or Timeshift from Omni-X), Missy at H=5 doesn't flip for a bare minimum of 4 turns, and that's if all she draws are Clues.  Every Diversion makes your life more miserable without getting you any closer to being able to end the game.  And having to leave as many as three of things like Misplaced Memo, Suspicious Malfunction, or Concealed Betrayal in play is even more of a pain than having to leave Citizens alive to un-flip Citizen Dawn.  I really believe that Missy at H = 5 should be at least nearly as hard as the Dreamer or Iron Legacy.

The entry page for the Google Doc for data entry still talks about the Shattered Timelines release.

yeah and thats unlikely to be updated anytime soon :P

Please use this new submit form

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1zCJwaHbUeS9VqbIhqZj2zAJ1TuWq5E0lnHWndheq1IM/viewform#start=invite

zelink551,

Is it possible to change the first post so that the new form is on the first post? I haven't followed the full thread so I didn't know there was a new form until I went to the last page.

Unforutnatly not for me - that person hasn't been on the forum for 10+months :P

But I maintain another thread on the General Forum thats been stickied with everythign in it, you might want to take a look at that :)

I'm sure that a helpful moderator could do the changing for us *blatant hinting*

I have edited his signature to include the new link :)

"Sir, I'm afraid you've gone mad with power…"

"Of course I have!  Have you ever tried going mad without power?  It's boring, nobody listens to you."

I wanted to thank everyone who has contributed to the statistical database.  It has been very helpful for my kids and I to help us ensure that when we play a game that the difficulty level is reasonable.  Attached is a set of tables I've made that are derived from the database.  The goal is to enable the players to pick a set of characters and environments that give a reasonable challenge, but prevent them from an unintentally easy or hard game.  These values are of course approximations, but I wanted to keep the math easy and quick.  I hope this is useful for others.

SotM Difficulty Guide Tables.pdf (40 KB)

This is pretty cool! I'm surprised the advanced chairman wasn't a 3

You might want to consider that some villains vary in difficulty at different H values. The Dreamer and Miss Information are both easier at H=3 because of having to defeat fewer projections or find fewer clues, etc. 

Error.

I have detected an error in your submissions form.

You are missing Cosmic Omnitron *beep*

*whirr* *click click*

End of Line

Fixed

And Alphabatized (mostly - everytime i moved something it started to .. move other options. I was baffled)

Fantastic!

Sorry peeps for being gone so long :( What can I update in this thread to better reflect updates?

Is this thing still being updated?
Just wondering

The project is still going. If you go to the links in the general forum you can find the location of the stats. Arathorn las updated them on Aug 15th I believe. Yep, this is still ongoing and awesome!

Ok, the last comment was 5 months ago, so I kind of guessed

I jumped the gun a little bit, since we have the names of everyone from WotC.

All the environments, heroes, villains, and promo's are up on the Survey now. Playtesters, if you are using the final proofs then by all means, put the data in, but if you arent then don't :P

have fun everyone!

For some reason, I always encounter an unexpected error when I try to use Arathorn's version, can anyone help me? 

http://public.tableausoftware.com/profile/arathorn#!/vizhome/Sentinels1/Overview

is that the link your using?

It works for me, if its not working for you, try clearing cache/cookies/the usual?

Wager Master introduces new ways in which the heroes can win/lose the game. Those should be included in the ways that the game can end (they were not there as of last Thursday).

Also, there's no clear option for the heroes winning by just destroying the villain.

The 'How did the Game End' question is only for special endings. If it ended by normal means (ie, you won by the normal method of defeating that villain) leaving it blank is automatically counted as the normal ways.

I think I will just put in 'Wager Master Alternate Win condition' as an option (and a Loss condition option as well) rather than all the possible ways

Wouldn't we also need alternate win/loss conditions for Kaargra Warfang based on the crowd favor?

(There's also a typo in her name on the form, too.)

Well spotted. Spelling error fixed, and 'The Crowd Turned' as an alternate loss for Kaargra Warfang. Considering the only way you can /win/ against her is to win the Crowd favor it isn't needed as an 'alternate' win victory.

Thanks. I was going entirely off of memory on her win/loss conditions. May not have been the best idea, since she's the one villain I haven't played against yet.

Minor update - For some reason, I never alphabatized the Environments. That is now the case, as well as the new ones that were announced with OblivAeon being added to the list.

As always, if youve access to the playtesting files, don't input games with them, since those files are subject to change :P