| Card Name | SCORE | Adjusted Win% | Gain% |
| Butcher: | 93.1 | 5.7% | 83% |
| King'sCourt: | 93.1 | 5.9% | 82.2% |
| CandlestickMaker: | 90.3 | 5% | 79.3% |
| Squire: | 90.2 | 4.6% | 81.5% |
| Peddler: | 88.4 | 5.5% | 73.6% |
| Forager: | 88.4 | 3.4% | 86.1% |
| WanderingMinstrel: | 88.3 | 4% | 80.7% |
| Goons: | 87.9 | 3.1% | 89.6% |
| Chapel: | 87.7 | 3.1% | 88% |
| GrandMarket: | 86.8 | 4.7% | 73.5% |
| Ambassador: | 86.1 | 2.9% | 84.8% |
| BorderVillage: | 86 | 2.8% | 86.5% |
| Haggler: | 83.9 | 5.2% | 67.3% |
| Menagerie: | 83.1 | 3.3% | 74.7% |
| Hermit: | 82.2 | 2.6% | 78.4% |
| Conspirator: | 81.9 | 4.1% | 68.5% |
| Remake: | 81.8 | 3.1% | 73.3% |
| City: | 81.3 | 2.9% | 73.6% |
| Festival: | 80.3 | 4.8% | 63.9% |
| Witch: | 79.9 | 2.2% | 76.9% |
| Baker: | 79.7 | 2.9% | 71.5% |
| Apprentice: | 78.1 | 3.4% | 66.4% |
| Pawn: | 77.9 | 4.3% | 62.4% |
| Market: | 77.6 | 4.5% | 61.3% |
| Inn: | 77.5 | 3.9% | 63.3% |
| Plaza: | 76.9 | 1.1% | 82.6% |
| Hamlet: | 76.8 | 1.1% | 82.3% |
| NativeVillage: | 76 | 3.9% | 61.5% |
| BanditCamp: | 75.9 | 4.1% | 60.8% |
| Counterfeit: | 75.9 | 1.5% | 76.2% |
| Tactician: | 75.7 | 3.6% | 62.2% |
| FarmingVillage: | 75.5 | 4.7% | 58.5% |
| Cellar: | 75.4 | 3.6% | 61.9% |
| Fortress: | 75.1 | 2.5% | 66.7% |
| Wharf: | 74.5 | 0.3% | 88.9% |
| ThroneRoom: | 74.3 | 2% | 69.1% |
| Masquerade: | 74.2 | 0.4% | 87.3% |
| Scheme: | 73.2 | 1.1% | 74.7% |
| FishingVillage: | 72.4 | 0.2% | 83.4% |
| Ill-GottenGains: | 72.2 | 3.9% | 57.1% |
| MerchantGuild: | 72.1 | 2.9% | 61.3% |
| Remodel: | 72 | 4.7% | 54.6% |
| Minion: | 71.7 | 0.3% | 80.1% |
| Altar: | 71.6 | 2.5% | 62.3% |
| HuntingParty: | 71.4 | 0.1% | 82.4% |
| Cultist: | 71.2 | 1% | 72.5% |
| MarketSquare: | 71.1 | 1% | 71.5% |
| ScryingPool: | 70 | 1.5% | 66.8% |
| GreatHall: | 69.8 | 0.7% | 72.5% |
| MiningVillage: | 68 | 1% | 67.6% |
| WishingWell: | 67.2 | 2.5% | 57.2% |
| Vineyard: | 66.8 | 3.4% | 53.1% |
| JunkDealer: | 66.7 | -0.3% | 76.3% |
| Courtyard: | 66.3 | -0.1% | 73.9% |
| Tunnel: | 65.8 | 0.6% | 67.5% |
| Bridge: | 64.6 | 0.7% | 64.9% |
| Mint: | 64.1 | 3.3% | 50.4% |
| HornofPlenty: | 64 | 5% | 44.9% |
| JackOfAllTrades: | 64 | -0.3% | 72% |
| GhostShip: | 63.8 | 1.9% | 56.5% |
| Apothecary: | 63.6 | 4.6% | 45.4% |
| Tournament: | 63.3 | -2% | 93.9% |
| HuntingGrounds: | 63.3 | 4.6% | 45% |
| Worker'sVillage: | 63.2 | -1.1% | 78.3% |
| Margrave: | 63.2 | 0% | 67.9% |
| Crossroads: | 63.1 | -0.9% | 75.7% |
| Lighthouse: | 62.6 | -0.5% | 71.7% |
| Mountebank: | 62.6 | -1.7% | 85.7% |
| Jester: | 62.3 | 3.1% | 49.3% |
| Journeyman: | 62.3 | 4.4% | 44.4% |
| Quarry: | 61.7 | 0.8% | 61% |
| Nobles: | 61.7 | -1.4% | 78.2% |
| Bazaar: | 61.2 | -0.3% | 67.9% |
| Warehouse: | 61.1 | -1.7% | 81.2% |
| Stables: | 61.1 | -0.5% | 68.8% |
| TradeRoute: | 60.8 | 3.3% | 46.7% |
| Caravan: | 60.5 | -0.9% | 71.6% |
| Treasury: | 60.3 | 4.9% | 40.8% |
| Moneylender: | 60.2 | 2.7% | 48.6% |
| Possession: | 60 | 6.3% | 37.3% |
| Haven: | 60 | -0.5% | 67.8% |
| Ironworks: | 59.6 | 0.8% | 58.1% |
| Alchemist: | 58.2 | 1.9% | 50.4% |
| Salvager: | 58.1 | -0.4% | 64.3% |
| Herald: | 57.3 | -2.1% | 76.9% |
| Advisor: | 56.9 | 1.9% | 48.9% |
| SeaHag: | 56.9 | 0.7% | 55.9% |
| Steward: | 56.9 | -2.5% | 79.7% |
| Swindler: | 56.4 | -2.7% | 80.2% |
| Island: | 56.3 | -1.3% | 68.1% |
| Armory: | 56.1 | 4.8% | 35.3% |
| Cartographer: | 56.1 | 2.4% | 45.4% |
| Upgrade: | 56.1 | -1.9% | 72.6% |
| Beggar: | 55.5 | 5.3% | 32.7% |
| Scavenger: | 55.3 | 1.9% | 47.1% |
| ShantyTown: | 54.5 | -1.8% | 69.6% |
| Stonemason: | 54.3 | -1.6% | 67.9% |
| BandofMisfits: | 54.2 | 2.3% | 44% |
| Watchtower: | 53.7 | -0.7% | 60.7% |
| Village: | 53.5 | -1.1% | 63.4% |
| Herbalist: | 53.5 | 6.4% | 25.5% |
| YoungWitch: | 53.2 | 1.2% | 48.8% |
| Laboratory: | 53.1 | -1.7% | 66.9% |
| Highway: | 52.6 | -2.2% | 69.4% |
| Expand: | 52.5 | 2.3% | 42% |
| Bishop: | 52 | 0.8% | 50% |
| Embargo: | 51.8 | 2.4% | 40.6% |
| Oasis: | 51.7 | -1.4% | 62.9% |
| Library: | 51.3 | 3% | 36.5% |
| Militia: | 51.2 | -0.8% | 58.8% |
| Storeroom: | 50.7 | 1.8% | 42.3% |
| Vagrant: | 49.9 | -1.7% | 62.6% |
| Doctor: | 49.8 | -0.2% | 53.4% |
| Lookout: | 49.8 | 0.4% | 50.1% |
| Contraband: | 49.7 | 6.7% | 9.6% |
| Urchin: | 49.6 | -4.3% | 77.6% |
| Harvest: | 49.3 | 6.5% | 8.6% |
| Baron: | 49.2 | 2% | 39.3% |
| Ironmonger: | 48.7 | -6.2% | 84.7% |
| Rebuild: | 48.6 | -2.8% | 67.6% |
| SpiceMerchant: | 48.5 | -2.9% | 68% |
| Sage: | 48.3 | -1.1% | 57.2% |
| MerchantShip: | 48.2 | 3.4% | 28.8% |
| Mandarin: | 48 | 5.2% | 13.7% |
| Outpost: | 47.5 | 3.3% | 27.8% |
| Rabble: | 47.5 | 0.6% | 46.3% |
| Mystic: | 47.1 | 1.6% | 39.2% |
| Farmland: | 46.7 | -0.5% | 52.3% |
| Procession: | 45.5 | 1.6% | 37.1% |
| Familiar: | 45 | -1.2% | 54.1% |
| Monument: | 44.9 | -1.6% | 56.3% |
| Develop: | 44.8 | 1.6% | 36% |
| Workshop: | 44.4 | 1.8% | 34.2% |
| Torturer: | 43.9 | -2% | 57.4% |
| Fool'sGold: | 43.1 | -2.7% | 60% |
| Catacombs: | 42.7 | -0.8% | 49.6% |
| Duchess: | 41.8 | 0.7% | 38.6% |
| PearlDiver: | 41.8 | -1.3% | 51.3% |
| TradingPost: | 41.7 | 0.4% | 40.6% |
| Bank: | 41.5 | 0.8% | 37.1% |
| Gardens: | 40.2 | -3% | 58.3% |
| Explorer: | 40.1 | 2.2% | 20.3% |
| Smithy: | 40 | -1.4% | 50% |
| Smugglers: | 39.6 | -1.2% | 48.5% |
| HorseTraders: | 39.5 | -3.5% | 59.5% |
| Fairgrounds: | 38.7 | -2% | 51.5% |
| University: | 37.6 | -5.2% | 62.6% |
| Rogue: | 37.5 | 0.4% | 34.9% |
| Count: | 36.9 | -5.7% | 62.9% |
| Feast: | 36.6 | 0.6% | 31.2% |
| Marauder: | 35.5 | -3.6% | 55.2% |
| CouncilRoom: | 35.2 | -1.8% | 46.7% |
| SilkRoad: | 33.8 | -3% | 51.2% |
| Harem: | 32.9 | -2.2% | 46.3% |
| Taxman: | 32.7 | 0.7% | 22.2% |
| Soothsayer: | 32.7 | -4.5% | 55.1% |
| FortuneTeller: | 32.4 | 0.3% | 26.6% |
| CountingHouse: | 30.7 | 0.8% | 9.1% |
| Masterpiece: | 29.6 | -0.1% | 25.3% |
| Embassy: | 29.4 | -2.8% | 45.3% |
| Trader: | 29.2 | -1.4% | 36.9% |
| Hoard: | 28.9 | -4.9% | 52.1% |
| Golem: | 26.2 | -2.5% | 39.6% |
| Duke: | 26.1 | -4.5% | 47.8% |
| Moat: | 25.8 | -3.3% | 43.5% |
| Feodum: | 25.3 | -2.4% | 38.2% |
| DeathCart: | 24.9 | -1.2% | 28.2% |
| Philosopher'sStone: | 24 | -0.4% | 9.9% |
| Oracle: | 23.5 | -4.1% | 43.6% |
| Venture: | 23.1 | -1.6% | 28.6% |
| Woodcutter: | 22.8 | -1.3% | 24% |
| Vault: | 22.1 | -5.2% | 45.2% |
| PoorHouse: | 21.7 | -2.6% | 34% |
| NomadCamp: | 21.6 | -4.2% | 41.6% |
| RoyalSeal: | 20.6 | -1.3% | 17.9% |
| Navigator: | 19.1 | -1.7% | 18.7% |
| Loan: | 19.1 | -3.8% | 36.9% |
| Forge: | 16.9 | -4.8% | 37.5% |
| Scout: | 16.8 | -1.8% | 8.6% |
| Chancellor: | 15.7 | -2.3% | 16.3% |
| Cutpurse: | 14.7 | -4.7% | 34.2% |
| Spy: | 14.5 | -3.2% | 24.8% |
| PirateShip: | 13.7 | -2.5% | 12% |
| Mine: | 12.1 | -2.9% | 11.5% |
| SecretChamber: | 11.3 | -4.1% | 24.2% |
| Rats: | 9.9 | -8.4% | 33.2% |
| Talisman: | 9.8 | -4.8% | 25.3% |
| NobleBrigand: | 9 | -4.9% | 23.6% |
| Pillage: | 8.1 | -5.1% | 22% |
| Graverobber: | 7.9 | -9.2% | 30.2% |
| Tribute: | 5.7 | -6% | 19.9% |
| Coppersmith: | 4.7 | -5.2% | 7.5% |
| Saboteur: | 3.7 | -8.4% | 19.5% |
| Transmute: | 3.6 | -5.8% | 6.5% |
| Adventurer: | 3.6 | -5.8% | 6.1% |
| Bureaucrat: | 3.5 | -6.3% | 11.4% |
| TreasureMap: | 3.2 | -8.5% | 17.5% |
| Cache: | 1.2 | -10.3% | 8.9% |
| Thief: | 1.1 | -17.2% | 8.5% |
| Card Name | All Players% | Top-20 Players Only% |
| Colony: | 78.6% | 93.5% |
| Goons: | 68.2% | 87.5% |
| Butcher: | 67.4% | 85.3% |
| Province: | 66.7% | 85.3% |
| Minion: | 66.6% | 77.1% |
| Vineyard: | 65.3% | 80.2% |
| King'sCourt: | 65.3% | 77.6% |
| Witch: | 62.5% | 77.7% |
| Baker: | 61.5% | 74.4% |
| Journeyman: | 61.3% | 76.3% |
| GrandMarket: | 60.8% | 73.2% |
| Masterpiece: | 60.6% | 67.6% |
| Mountebank: | 60.2% | 80.7% |
| Peddler: | 59.9% | 79.6% |
| Platinum: | 59.3% | 81.8% |
| BorderVillage: | 58.1% | 80.4% |
| Wharf: | 57.9% | 72.7% |
| Margrave: | 57.8% | 75.3% |
| WishingWell: | 57.5% | 69% |
| Catacombs: | 57.2% | 70.6% |
| Governor: | 57.1% | 73.9% |
| MerchantGuild: | 57% | 74.2% |
| Beggar: | 56.8% | 75.6% |
| GhostShip: | 56.2% | 77.1% |
| Explorer: | 55.9% | 72.5% |
| HornofPlenty: | 55.8% | 76.3% |
| Mint: | 55.8% | 78.8% |
| Library: | 55.8% | 69.9% |
| HuntingParty: | 55.7% | 70.3% |
| HuntingGrounds: | 54.7% | 78.6% |
| Ill-GottenGains: | 54.5% | 66.3% |
| MerchantShip: | 54.4% | 69.2% |
| Estate: | 54.1% | 69.9% |
| Laboratory: | 54.1% | 75.9% |
| MiningVillage: | 53.5% | 70.4% |
| Bazaar: | 53.3% | 72% |
| Masquerade: | 53.2% | 76.3% |
| Rogue: | 52.9% | 75.4% |
| Warehouse: | 52.8% | 61.6% |
| Pawn: | 52.8% | 73.3% |
| Festival: | 52.8% | 75.6% |
| Nobles: | 52.8% | 71.2% |
| Farmland: | 52.8% | 72% |
| ScryingPool: | 52.7% | 72.1% |
| Armory: | 52.7% | 70.6% |
| Apothecary: | 52.6% | 73% |
| Stonemason: | 52.6% | 63.2% |
| Possession: | 52.5% | 73.2% |
| Crossroads: | 52.3% | 68.8% |
| CountingHouse: | 52.2% | 69.7% |
| Menagerie: | 52.1% | 71.4% |
| JackOfAllTrades: | 52% | 63.4% |
| Copper: | 52% | 67.8% |
| CandlestickMaker: | 51.9% | 66.2% |
| Embassy: | 51.7% | 68.5% |
| WanderingMinstrel: | 51.6% | 66.7% |
| Hamlet: | 51.4% | 64.8% |
| Apprentice: | 51.3% | 71.6% |
| Altar: | 51.3% | 68% |
| BanditCamp: | 51.2% | 66.7% |
| Chancellor: | 51% | 69.6% |
| Familiar: | 51% | 74.7% |
| Scheme: | 50.9% | 69.3% |
| Mystic: | 50.9% | 65.5% |
| Hermit: | 50.7% | 64.3% |
| Scavenger: | 50.6% | 66.7% |
| Conspirator: | 50.5% | 72.2% |
| Quarry: | 50.5% | 67.4% |
| Highway: | 50.5% | 68.3% |
| Oracle: | 50.3% | 57.6% |
| HorseTraders: | 50.3% | 62.5% |
| Vault: | 50% | 60.2% |
| Fairgrounds: | 50% | 61.5% |
| ThroneRoom: | 50% | 64.8% |
| Harem: | 49.9% | 67.1% |
| Bridge: | 49.9% | 74.3% |
| Herald: | 49.9% | 62.9% |
| Counterfeit: | 49.8% | 70% |
| Workshop: | 49.8% | 62.3% |
| PearlDiver: | 49.8% | 65.4% |
| Worker'sVillage: | 49.8% | 66.7% |
| PoorHouse: | 49.7% | 62.7% |
| TradingPost: | 49.7% | 68.7% |
| JunkDealer: | 49.7% | 66.7% |
| Market: | 49.7% | 63.6% |
| City: | 49.5% | 80.9% |
| GreatHall: | 49.5% | 61.9% |
| FishingVillage: | 49.5% | 68.1% |
| Duchess: | 49.4% | 65.3% |
| Watchtower: | 49.3% | 68.1% |
| Inn: | 49.3% | 72% |
| Duke: | 49.1% | 64.6% |
| Treasury: | 49% | 71.2% |
| Contraband: | 49% | 75.8% |
| Rabble: | 48.9% | 72.9% |
| Fool'sGold: | 48.8% | 64.1% |
| Venture: | 48.7% | 67.7% |
| FarmingVillage: | 48.7% | 74.1% |
| Herbalist: | 48.6% | 72.1% |
| Ironmonger: | 48.6% | 62.5% |
| Stables: | 48.6% | 62.7% |
| Steward: | 48.6% | 54.8% |
| Courtyard: | 48.6% | 64.7% |
| Salvager: | 48.5% | 72.6% |
| Tournament: | 48.5% | 80% |
| Torturer: | 48.4% | 67.9% |
| Fortress: | 48.3% | 66.7% |
| Ambassador: | 48.2% | 62.5% |
| Sage: | 48.1% | 61.6% |
| SeaHag: | 48% | 63.1% |
| Squire: | 47.9% | 69.8% |
| Village: | 47.9% | 62.3% |
| Moneylender: | 47.9% | 75.6% |
| RoyalSeal: | 47.8% | 60% |
| Chapel: | 47.8% | 63.2% |
| Haggler: | 47.8% | 66.2% |
| BandofMisfits: | 47.8% | 65.8% |
| Feast: | 47.7% | 64.8% |
| Plaza: | 47.7% | 62.7% |
| Count: | 47.6% | 56.8% |
| Duchy: | 47.6% | 62.7% |
| Haven: | 47.5% | 58.1% |
| Swindler: | 47.4% | 65.2% |
| Woodcutter: | 47.4% | 66.1% |
| Gardens: | 47.2% | 62.2% |
| Remodel: | 47.2% | 65.4% |
| Mine: | 46.9% | 61.5% |
| BlackMarket: | 46.9% | 69.1% |
| Hoard: | 46.9% | 61.7% |
| Adventurer: | 46.8% | 73.9% |
| Gold: | 46.8% | 66.9% |
| ShantyTown: | 46.7% | 62.1% |
| Embargo: | 46.6% | 68.9% |
| Outpost: | 46.4% | 69.2% |
| Bank: | 46.3% | 65.3% |
| Urchin: | 46.2% | 57.6% |
| Smithy: | 46.1% | 66.4% |
| Cultist: | 46% | 72.1% |
| Lighthouse: | 46% | 58.8% |
| Procession: | 45.9% | 63.5% |
| NativeVillage: | 45.9% | 58% |
| Remake: | 45.8% | 70.6% |
| CouncilRoom: | 45.8% | 59.1% |
| Doctor: | 45.8% | 59% |
| NomadCamp: | 45.6% | 61.2% |
| Loan: | 45.6% | 62.1% |
| Mandarin: | 45.5% | 68% |
| Rebuild: | 45.4% | 61.5% |
| Vagrant: | 45.4% | 59.5% |
| Tactician: | 44.9% | 63% |
| Cartographer: | 44.9% | 62.8% |
| Expand: | 44.9% | 64.1% |
| TradeRoute: | 44.8% | 63.9% |
| Ironworks: | 44.7% | 62% |
| FortuneTeller: | 44.7% | 55.3% |
| Militia: | 44.6% | 57.5% |
| Marauder: | 44.5% | 68.3% |
| Baron: | 44.4% | 63.1% |
| Navigator: | 44.3% | 56.3% |
| Cellar: | 44.1% | 68.1% |
| Monument: | 44% | 71% |
| Bureaucrat: | 43.9% | 58.3% |
| Upgrade: | 43.8% | 57.1% |
| Taxman: | 43.6% | 71.2% |
| Potion: | 43.6% | 64.2% |
| Storeroom: | 43.6% | 59.7% |
| Moat: | 43.5% | 66.7% |
| Graverobber: | 43.3% | 51.9% |
| MarketSquare: | 43.2% | 60.5% |
| Caravan: | 43.2% | 69.2% |
| Island: | 43% | 57.9% |
| Lookout: | 42.7% | 64.6% |
| Smugglers: | 42.6% | 61.6% |
| Cutpurse: | 42.6% | 56.5% |
| Cache: | 42.5% | 46.4% |
| Harvest: | 42.2% | 71.4% |
| YoungWitch: | 42% | 64.7% |
| Advisor: | 41.6% | 64.4% |
| Alchemist: | 41.6% | 71.4% |
| Silver: | 41.5% | 54.8% |
| Golem: | 41.5% | 58.9% |
| Soothsayer: | 41.5% | 57.4% |
| TreasureMap: | 41.4% | 54% |
| Bishop: | 41.3% | 61% |
| Curse: | 41.3% | 54.3% |
| Feodum: | 41.2% | 55.4% |
| Trader: | 41% | 66.7% |
| DeathCart: | 41% | 56.8% |
| Develop: | 40.9% | 63% |
| Tunnel: | 40.8% | 62.5% |
| SpiceMerchant: | 40.7% | 63.2% |
| Pillage: | 40.7% | 60.3% |
| Rats: | 40.5% | 46.5% |
| Oasis: | 40.4% | 56.2% |
| Spy: | 40.3% | 53.1% |
| SilkRoad: | 40.2% | 43.3% |
| Philosopher'sStone: | 39.3% | 53.1% |
| SecretChamber: | 38.8% | 50% |
| Forager: | 38.7% | 52% |
| Forge: | 38.2% | 57.6% |
| Jester: | 38% | 59.4% |
| NobleBrigand: | 37.7% | 47.3% |
| Talisman: | 37.5% | 53.3% |
| Transmute: | 36% | 60.9% |
| Saboteur: | 35.9% | 50.9% |
| Thief: | 35.7% | 38.9% |
| Scout: | 35.6% | 62.9% |
| University: | 33.1% | 41.1% |
| Coppersmith: | 32.5% | 54.2% |
| Tribute: | 31.1% | 54.1% |
| PirateShip: | 24.3% | 46.4% |
I'm pretty shocked that Candlestick Maker is so high.
CandlestickMaker: 90.3 5% 79.3%
Pawn: 77.9 4.3% 62.4%
Possession: 60 6.3% 37.3%
Beggar: 55.5 5.3% 32.7%
I'm pretty shocked that Candlestick Maker is so high.I actually am not. Its cheapness, +buy, +action, makes it very spamable and then it makes it very deadly as a 3 pile ender where a 3 pile game maybe wasnt an option. Not to mention its most important function, those very useful coin tokens. Its a must buy for me almost everytime!
I'm pretty shocked that Candlestick Maker is so high.I actually am not. Its cheapness, +buy, +action, makes it very spamable and then it makes it very deadly as a 3 pile ender where a 3 pile game maybe wasnt an option. Not to mention its most important function, those very useful coin tokens. Its a must buy for me almost everytime!
How are you calculating the Standard Deviation? It's the St Dev across... what?
How are you calculating the Standard Deviation? It's the St Dev across... what?
It's the SD of the "Gain %" column. Likewise with "Win %" column.
in other words: StDev{ (Card A Games Bought)/(Card A Games Available), (Card B Games Bought)/(Card B Games Available), (Card C Games Bought)/(Card C Games Available), .... etc.}
or for Win%: StDev{ (Card A Games Won)/(Card A Games Bought), (Card B Games Won)/(Card B Games Bought), (Card C Games Won)/(Card C Games Bought), .... etc.}
How are you calculating the Standard Deviation? It's the St Dev across... what?
It's the SD of the "Gain %" column. Likewise with "Win %" column.
in other words: StDev{ (Card A Games Bought)/(Card A Games Available), (Card B Games Bought)/(Card B Games Available), (Card C Games Bought)/(Card C Games Available), .... etc.}
or for Win%: StDev{ (Card A Games Won)/(Card A Games Bought), (Card B Games Won)/(Card B Games Bought), (Card C Games Won)/(Card C Games Bought), .... etc.}
So the standard deviation between cards? It's the same for every single card then?
Ok, cool. My point is that when you are caulculating your 'score' metric, you divide by a st dev, then take the Normal CDF. But in that formula, the st dev you are dividing by is the same for all cards.How are you calculating the Standard Deviation? It's the St Dev across... what?
It's the SD of the "Gain %" column. Likewise with "Win %" column.
in other words: StDev{ (Card A Games Bought)/(Card A Games Available), (Card B Games Bought)/(Card B Games Available), (Card C Games Bought)/(Card C Games Available), .... etc.}
or for Win%: StDev{ (Card A Games Won)/(Card A Games Bought), (Card B Games Won)/(Card B Games Bought), (Card C Games Won)/(Card C Games Bought), .... etc.}
So the standard deviation between cards? It's the same for every single card then?
Not sure what you mean by it being the same for every single card. It's the standard deviation of the set of all cards.
Pawn stands out too. I'd attribute this to the fact that this is a data set of Top 20 players who win most of their games and are better than most of their opponents. In games where Candlestick Maker and Pawn are gained, it is more likely to be an engine-friendly board on which higher skill players excel (Candlestick Maker is not a strong Big Money card to take over Silver, for example, but is a good source of +buy for an engine). These also have a high gain rate due to being nonterminals costing $2 (for example, the lowly Pearl Diver is bought on 51% of boards, vs. 62% for Pawn and 79% for Candlestick Maker).
Candlestick maker is very not-spammable.
The first one is great, the second one ok, the 3rd one bad and from there on they're all terrible.
I win a lot of games because my opponent just keeps buying them.
Squire: 90.2 4.6% 81.5%
Ok, cool. My point is that when you are caulculating your 'score' metric, you divide by a st dev, then take the Normal CDF. But in that formula, the st dev you are dividing by is the same for all cards.How are you calculating the Standard Deviation? It's the St Dev across... what?
It's the SD of the "Gain %" column. Likewise with "Win %" column.
in other words: StDev{ (Card A Games Bought)/(Card A Games Available), (Card B Games Bought)/(Card B Games Available), (Card C Games Bought)/(Card C Games Available), .... etc.}
or for Win%: StDev{ (Card A Games Won)/(Card A Games Bought), (Card B Games Won)/(Card B Games Bought), (Card C Games Won)/(Card C Games Bought), .... etc.}
So the standard deviation between cards? It's the same for every single card then?
Not sure what you mean by it being the same for every single card. It's the standard deviation of the set of all cards.
Edit: Which isn't inherently wrong, just I don't know that this is what you want to do/something which is really meaningful. Mostly still just trying to wrap my head around what it really means.
How are you calculating the Standard Deviation? It's the St Dev across... what?
It's the SD of the "Gain %" column. Likewise with "Win %" column.
in other words: StDev{ (Card A Games Bought)/(Card A Games Available), (Card B Games Bought)/(Card B Games Available), (Card C Games Bought)/(Card C Games Available), .... etc.}
or for Win%: StDev{ (Card A Games Won)/(Card A Games Bought), (Card B Games Won)/(Card B Games Bought), (Card C Games Won)/(Card C Games Bought), .... etc.}
So the standard deviation between cards? It's the same for every single card then?
Not sure what you mean by it being the same for every single card. It's the standard deviation of the set of all cards.
You're missing something. He's dividing before taking the Normal CDF.How are you calculating the Standard Deviation? It's the St Dev across... what?
It's the SD of the "Gain %" column. Likewise with "Win %" column.
in other words: StDev{ (Card A Games Bought)/(Card A Games Available), (Card B Games Bought)/(Card B Games Available), (Card C Games Bought)/(Card C Games Available), .... etc.}
or for Win%: StDev{ (Card A Games Won)/(Card A Games Bought), (Card B Games Won)/(Card B Games Bought), (Card C Games Won)/(Card C Games Bought), .... etc.}
So the standard deviation between cards? It's the same for every single card then?
Not sure what you mean by it being the same for every single card. It's the standard deviation of the set of all cards.
I am clearly not Wandering Winder, but I think I share his confusion. What I took his question to be is that the denominator of the first term contributing to score and the second term contributing to score (the SD of the relevant columns) is the same for every card that has a score. And that seems to be the case. So...you don't really need it? I mean, you're taking the CDF for both terms, which varies between 0 and 1, which is how you get a 0-100 scale after you multiply by 50. Normalizing first doesn't really get you anything. Unless I'm missing something.
You're missing something. He's dividing before taking the Normal CDF.How are you calculating the Standard Deviation? It's the St Dev across... what?
It's the SD of the "Gain %" column. Likewise with "Win %" column.
in other words: StDev{ (Card A Games Bought)/(Card A Games Available), (Card B Games Bought)/(Card B Games Available), (Card C Games Bought)/(Card C Games Available), .... etc.}
or for Win%: StDev{ (Card A Games Won)/(Card A Games Bought), (Card B Games Won)/(Card B Games Bought), (Card C Games Won)/(Card C Games Bought), .... etc.}
So the standard deviation between cards? It's the same for every single card then?
Not sure what you mean by it being the same for every single card. It's the standard deviation of the set of all cards.
I am clearly not Wandering Winder, but I think I share his confusion. What I took his question to be is that the denominator of the first term contributing to score and the second term contributing to score (the SD of the relevant columns) is the same for every card that has a score. And that seems to be the case. So...you don't really need it? I mean, you're taking the CDF for both terms, which varies between 0 and 1, which is how you get a 0-100 scale after you multiply by 50. Normalizing first doesn't really get you anything. Unless I'm missing something.
I'm pretty shocked that Candlestick Maker is so high.I actually am not. Its cheapness, +buy, +action, makes it very spamable and then it makes it very deadly as a 3 pile ender where a 3 pile game maybe wasnt an option. Not to mention its most important function, those very useful coin tokens. Its a must buy for me almost everytime!
Candlestick maker is very not-spammable.
The first one is great, the second one ok, the 3rd one bad and from there on they're all terrible.
I win a lot of games because my opponent just keeps buying them.
With vineyards sure, but otherwise no thanks.
Incidentally, if you take the "Gain % Rank" and subtract the "Win % Rank" you get a pretty reasonable illustration of the "swingiest" cards:
1. Ironmonger (?? I don't quite get this one.)
2. Urchin (Makes sense; whoever collides their Urchins first has a huge advantage).
3. Tournament (duh.)
4. Swindler (also duh.)
5. Mountebank (also also duh.)
The justification being; these are cards powerful enough to justify top-tier players buying them more often than not. But also brainless enough that anyone can play them and have a decent shot at winning.
IN OTHER WORDS: WHEN YOU PLAY GOOD PEOPLE BUY ALL THE URCHINS AND SWINDLERSSSS
Ironmonger is just almost always a good card. It's a Village in a thinned engine-deck. It's more than a Peddler in almost any other kind of deck because of it's discard ability. It's a good opener.
I don't think, it's a card that signals any specific strategy. So I guess, it's win rate should be about average, right?
edit: No, I'm wrong. It has -6.2% win rate, but more than 88% gain rate. That's really strange. Maybe it's just overrated even by the top players?
You're missing something. He's dividing before taking the Normal CDF.How are you calculating the Standard Deviation? It's the St Dev across... what?
It's the SD of the "Gain %" column. Likewise with "Win %" column.
in other words: StDev{ (Card A Games Bought)/(Card A Games Available), (Card B Games Bought)/(Card B Games Available), (Card C Games Bought)/(Card C Games Available), .... etc.}
or for Win%: StDev{ (Card A Games Won)/(Card A Games Bought), (Card B Games Won)/(Card B Games Bought), (Card C Games Won)/(Card C Games Bought), .... etc.}
So the standard deviation between cards? It's the same for every single card then?
Not sure what you mean by it being the same for every single card. It's the standard deviation of the set of all cards.
I am clearly not Wandering Winder, but I think I share his confusion. What I took his question to be is that the denominator of the first term contributing to score and the second term contributing to score (the SD of the relevant columns) is the same for every card that has a score. And that seems to be the case. So...you don't really need it? I mean, you're taking the CDF for both terms, which varies between 0 and 1, which is how you get a 0-100 scale after you multiply by 50. Normalizing first doesn't really get you anything. Unless I'm missing something.
Yes, I saw that like three seconds after I posted. A victim of my own R coding practices of yore, where I generally used ecdf (the empirical CDF). And then I saw TheExpressicist's post that ranks would be basically as good, and I agree there.
But I'm still not sure what you gain from making a single index here. Especially when we are talking about *card* strength.
Imagine a card called "Winner" that costs $0 and allows you to win when played. Everybody would gain it like crazy (100% gain, for the purposes of this thread) and it would be (nearly?) a total crap shoot to win with it, so I guess it would be like -15% or something in this scheme and its score might even be somewhere south of Rebuild's.
Stef: You think Ironmonger is bad on Mountebank boards? Really? And you think it's significantly worse than, say, silver?
Ironmonger is bad on Mountebank boards? Really? And you think it's significantly worse than, say, silver?
Yeah. I think this list has a very (very) rough relationship with how good the cards are, but that isn't really good for much at all.
More important, these are overall rankings. On any given board, you can throw them out the window - it doesn't matter that 195 other cards exist which might make card X good or bad. You only have the other 9 which exist right then and there, and that's basically always going to be a lot different than the general case.
Re: the metric itself. The source of my head-scratching is, you applied a normal CDF to it. People do this all the time, and I'm not sure why - my guess is that it's because they did it all the time in their one stats course. But the thing is, most data isn't normally-distributed. So I can kind of understand wanting to do some kind of normalization to get things on the same scale, and I can kind of understand how how often the card is gained and how much you win when it is vs when it isn't are related to how good the card is, but even beyond the limitations of the approach from that perspective, I can't really get behind applying the Gaussian transformation.
Yeah. I think this list has a very (very) rough relationship with how good the cards are, but that isn't really good for much at all.
More important, these are overall rankings. On any given board, you can throw them out the window - it doesn't matter that 195 other cards exist which might make card X good or bad. You only have the other 9 which exist right then and there, and that's basically always going to be a lot different than the general case.
Agreed. I think what it's good for is looking at the cards with high gain rates and say, "Okay, so, good people buy this card in 8 out of 10 kingdoms. Is this kingdom I'm playing in really the exception to that?"QuoteRe: the metric itself. The source of my head-scratching is, you applied a normal CDF to it. People do this all the time, and I'm not sure why - my guess is that it's because they did it all the time in their one stats course. But the thing is, most data isn't normally-distributed. So I can kind of understand wanting to do some kind of normalization to get things on the same scale, and I can kind of understand how how often the card is gained and how much you win when it is vs when it isn't are related to how good the card is, but even beyond the limitations of the approach from that perspective, I can't really get behind applying the Gaussian transformation.
It's normal-ish. The main reason for applying the CDF was to minimize the impact of the outliers; cards that were gained <10% of the time or so. Something that's, say, 5 SD away from the mean is accounted for roughly the same as something that's 3SD away from the mean. As I mentioned earlier, a much simpler way of doing it would have just been to take the actual ranking of the card (e.g. the 2nd least gained card has a score of 2, the 10th least gained card has a score of 10, etc.). I re-ran the numbers doing it that way and the scores are more or less the same. The most any card gained or lost was 4 "points" and the average difference was like 1.5 points.
It's really not the same as taking ranks. I suppose it 'smooths outliers', but that presumes those things shouldn't be so far out, and my intuition doesn't tell me that's correct.
Incidentally, if you take the "Gain % Rank" and subtract the "Win % Rank" you get a pretty reasonable illustration of the "swingiest" cards:This is a very useful post, and it's interesting to see these commonplace beliefs statistically verified somehow.
1. Ironmonger (?? I don't quite get this one.)
2. Urchin (Makes sense; whoever collides their Urchins first has a huge advantage).
3. Tournament (duh.)
4. Swindler (also duh.)
5. Mountebank (also also duh.)
The justification being; these are cards powerful enough to justify top-tier players buying them more often than not. But also brainless enough that anyone can play them and have a decent shot at winning.
IN OTHER WORDS: WHEN YOU PLAY GOOD PEOPLE BUY ALL THE URCHINS AND SWINDLERSSSS
It's really not the same as taking ranks. I suppose it 'smooths outliers', but that presumes those things shouldn't be so far out, and my intuition doesn't tell me that's correct.
In the general sense, it's not. But in this case, it does approximate just taking ranks. Which as I mentioned before, was the effect I was shooting for. (See my previous post regarding the fact that using rankings resulted in approximately the same score +-2 points). We're not trying to draw any standard statistical conclusions here; it's an invented metric that's deliberately abstract in order to discourage people from trying to apply the score where it's not appropriate to do so.
P.S. I also do stats for a living.
Yeah. I think this list has a very (very) rough relationship with how good the cards are, but that isn't really good for much at all.
More important, these are overall rankings. On any given board, you can throw them out the window - it doesn't matter that 195 other cards exist which might make card X good or bad. You only have the other 9 which exist right then and there, and that's basically always going to be a lot different than the general case.
Re: the metric itself. The source of my head-scratching is, you applied a normal CDF to it. People do this all the time, and I'm not sure why - my guess is that it's because they did it all the time in their one stats course.
Incidentally, if you take the "Gain % Rank" and subtract the "Win % Rank" you get a pretty reasonable illustration of the "swingiest" cards:This is a very useful post, and it's interesting to see these commonplace beliefs statistically verified somehow.
1. Ironmonger (?? I don't quite get this one.)
2. Urchin (Makes sense; whoever collides their Urchins first has a huge advantage).
3. Tournament (duh.)
4. Swindler (also duh.)
5. Mountebank (also also duh.)
The justification being; these are cards powerful enough to justify top-tier players buying them more often than not. But also brainless enough that anyone can play them and have a decent shot at winning.
IN OTHER WORDS: WHEN YOU PLAY GOOD PEOPLE BUY ALL THE URCHINS AND SWINDLERSSSS
Knowing what cards are more likely to be gained by the strongest players (modulo the high situation-dependency you note) can be useful for the rest of us
I've always considered people complaning about Urchin's swinginess to be idiots. My winrate in Urchin mirrors is 63%, guess I'm just very lucky when it comes to colliding them!
Here's a fairly simple metric I'd like to see: Take the games in which exactly one player gains a card, then find in what percentage of those games the player who got the card won. Obviously this won't tell the entire story (true of any metric), but I like simple, intuitive things in general, when people can both understand the metric and its limitations.
I've always considered people complaning about Urchin's swinginess to be idiots. My winrate in Urchin mirrors is 63%, guess I'm just very lucky when it comes to colliding them!
I've always considered people complaining about people complaining about Urchin's swinginess to be idiots. I mean, they could just be better players, go figure.
Here's a fairly simple metric I'd like to see: Take the games in which exactly one player gains a card, then find in what percentage of those games the player who got the card won. Obviously this won't tell the entire story (true of any metric), but I like simple, intuitive things in general, when people can both understand the metric and its limitations.
I've always considered people complaning about Urchin's swinginess to be idiots. My winrate in Urchin mirrors is 63%, guess I'm just very lucky when it comes to colliding them!
I've always considered people complaining about people complaining about Urchin's swinginess to be idiots. I mean, they could just be better players, go figure.
Next time you try to pick a fight make sure you actually have a point, lol. Having an above average winrate with a card is pretty damning evidence against its being swingy if your average opponent is worse than you.
Next time you try to pick a fight make sure you actually have a point, lol. Having an above average winrate with a card is pretty damning evidence against its being swingy if your average opponent is worse than you.
QuoteKnowing what cards are more likely to be gained by the strongest players (modulo the high situation-dependency you note) can be useful for the rest of us
I doubt this is very useful, if someone 20 levels below me were to copy my exact gain %s he'd almost certainly be getting worse results than he's getting now.
| Card Name | All Players% | Top-20 Players Only% |
| Colony: | 78.6% | 93.5% |
| Goons: | 68.2% | 87.5% |
| Butcher: | 67.4% | 85.3% |
| Province: | 66.7% | 85.3% |
| Minion: | 66.6% | 77.1% |
| Vineyard: | 65.3% | 80.2% |
| King'sCourt: | 65.3% | 77.6% |
| Witch: | 62.5% | 77.7% |
| Baker: | 61.5% | 74.4% |
| Journeyman: | 61.3% | 76.3% |
| GrandMarket: | 60.8% | 73.2% |
| Masterpiece: | 60.6% | 67.6% |
| Mountebank: | 60.2% | 80.7% |
| Peddler: | 59.9% | 79.6% |
| Platinum: | 59.3% | 81.8% |
| BorderVillage: | 58.1% | 80.4% |
| Wharf: | 57.9% | 72.7% |
| Margrave: | 57.8% | 75.3% |
| WishingWell: | 57.5% | 69% |
| Catacombs: | 57.2% | 70.6% |
| Governor: | 57.1% | 73.9% |
| MerchantGuild: | 57% | 74.2% |
| Beggar: | 56.8% | 75.6% |
| GhostShip: | 56.2% | 77.1% |
| Explorer: | 55.9% | 72.5% |
| HornofPlenty: | 55.8% | 76.3% |
| Mint: | 55.8% | 78.8% |
| Library: | 55.8% | 69.9% |
| HuntingParty: | 55.7% | 70.3% |
| HuntingGrounds: | 54.7% | 78.6% |
| Ill-GottenGains: | 54.5% | 66.3% |
| MerchantShip: | 54.4% | 69.2% |
| Estate: | 54.1% | 69.9% |
| Laboratory: | 54.1% | 75.9% |
| MiningVillage: | 53.5% | 70.4% |
| Bazaar: | 53.3% | 72% |
| Masquerade: | 53.2% | 76.3% |
| Rogue: | 52.9% | 75.4% |
| Warehouse: | 52.8% | 61.6% |
| Pawn: | 52.8% | 73.3% |
| Festival: | 52.8% | 75.6% |
| Nobles: | 52.8% | 71.2% |
| Farmland: | 52.8% | 72% |
| ScryingPool: | 52.7% | 72.1% |
| Armory: | 52.7% | 70.6% |
| Apothecary: | 52.6% | 73% |
| Stonemason: | 52.6% | 63.2% |
| Possession: | 52.5% | 73.2% |
| Crossroads: | 52.3% | 68.8% |
| CountingHouse: | 52.2% | 69.7% |
| Menagerie: | 52.1% | 71.4% |
| JackOfAllTrades: | 52% | 63.4% |
| Copper: | 52% | 67.8% |
| CandlestickMaker: | 51.9% | 66.2% |
| Embassy: | 51.7% | 68.5% |
| WanderingMinstrel: | 51.6% | 66.7% |
| Hamlet: | 51.4% | 64.8% |
| Apprentice: | 51.3% | 71.6% |
| Altar: | 51.3% | 68% |
| BanditCamp: | 51.2% | 66.7% |
| Chancellor: | 51% | 69.6% |
| Familiar: | 51% | 74.7% |
| Scheme: | 50.9% | 69.3% |
| Mystic: | 50.9% | 65.5% |
| Hermit: | 50.7% | 64.3% |
| Scavenger: | 50.6% | 66.7% |
| Conspirator: | 50.5% | 72.2% |
| Quarry: | 50.5% | 67.4% |
| Highway: | 50.5% | 68.3% |
| Oracle: | 50.3% | 57.6% |
| HorseTraders: | 50.3% | 62.5% |
| Vault: | 50% | 60.2% |
| Fairgrounds: | 50% | 61.5% |
| ThroneRoom: | 50% | 64.8% |
| Harem: | 49.9% | 67.1% |
| Bridge: | 49.9% | 74.3% |
| Herald: | 49.9% | 62.9% |
| Counterfeit: | 49.8% | 70% |
| Workshop: | 49.8% | 62.3% |
| PearlDiver: | 49.8% | 65.4% |
| Worker'sVillage: | 49.8% | 66.7% |
| PoorHouse: | 49.7% | 62.7% |
| TradingPost: | 49.7% | 68.7% |
| JunkDealer: | 49.7% | 66.7% |
| Market: | 49.7% | 63.6% |
| City: | 49.5% | 80.9% |
| GreatHall: | 49.5% | 61.9% |
| FishingVillage: | 49.5% | 68.1% |
| Duchess: | 49.4% | 65.3% |
| Watchtower: | 49.3% | 68.1% |
| Inn: | 49.3% | 72% |
| Duke: | 49.1% | 64.6% |
| Treasury: | 49% | 71.2% |
| Contraband: | 49% | 75.8% |
| Rabble: | 48.9% | 72.9% |
| Fool'sGold: | 48.8% | 64.1% |
| Venture: | 48.7% | 67.7% |
| FarmingVillage: | 48.7% | 74.1% |
| Herbalist: | 48.6% | 72.1% |
| Ironmonger: | 48.6% | 62.5% |
| Stables: | 48.6% | 62.7% |
| Steward: | 48.6% | 54.8% |
| Courtyard: | 48.6% | 64.7% |
| Salvager: | 48.5% | 72.6% |
| Tournament: | 48.5% | 80% |
| Torturer: | 48.4% | 67.9% |
| Fortress: | 48.3% | 66.7% |
| Ambassador: | 48.2% | 62.5% |
| Sage: | 48.1% | 61.6% |
| SeaHag: | 48% | 63.1% |
| Squire: | 47.9% | 69.8% |
| Village: | 47.9% | 62.3% |
| Moneylender: | 47.9% | 75.6% |
| RoyalSeal: | 47.8% | 60% |
| Chapel: | 47.8% | 63.2% |
| Haggler: | 47.8% | 66.2% |
| BandofMisfits: | 47.8% | 65.8% |
| Feast: | 47.7% | 64.8% |
| Plaza: | 47.7% | 62.7% |
| Count: | 47.6% | 56.8% |
| Duchy: | 47.6% | 62.7% |
| Haven: | 47.5% | 58.1% |
| Swindler: | 47.4% | 65.2% |
| Woodcutter: | 47.4% | 66.1% |
| Gardens: | 47.2% | 62.2% |
| Remodel: | 47.2% | 65.4% |
| Mine: | 46.9% | 61.5% |
| BlackMarket: | 46.9% | 69.1% |
| Hoard: | 46.9% | 61.7% |
| Adventurer: | 46.8% | 73.9% |
| Gold: | 46.8% | 66.9% |
| ShantyTown: | 46.7% | 62.1% |
| Embargo: | 46.6% | 68.9% |
| Outpost: | 46.4% | 69.2% |
| Bank: | 46.3% | 65.3% |
| Urchin: | 46.2% | 57.6% |
| Smithy: | 46.1% | 66.4% |
| Cultist: | 46% | 72.1% |
| Lighthouse: | 46% | 58.8% |
| Procession: | 45.9% | 63.5% |
| NativeVillage: | 45.9% | 58% |
| Remake: | 45.8% | 70.6% |
| CouncilRoom: | 45.8% | 59.1% |
| Doctor: | 45.8% | 59% |
| NomadCamp: | 45.6% | 61.2% |
| Loan: | 45.6% | 62.1% |
| Mandarin: | 45.5% | 68% |
| Rebuild: | 45.4% | 61.5% |
| Vagrant: | 45.4% | 59.5% |
| Tactician: | 44.9% | 63% |
| Cartographer: | 44.9% | 62.8% |
| Expand: | 44.9% | 64.1% |
| TradeRoute: | 44.8% | 63.9% |
| Ironworks: | 44.7% | 62% |
| FortuneTeller: | 44.7% | 55.3% |
| Militia: | 44.6% | 57.5% |
| Marauder: | 44.5% | 68.3% |
| Baron: | 44.4% | 63.1% |
| Navigator: | 44.3% | 56.3% |
| Cellar: | 44.1% | 68.1% |
| Monument: | 44% | 71% |
| Bureaucrat: | 43.9% | 58.3% |
| Upgrade: | 43.8% | 57.1% |
| Taxman: | 43.6% | 71.2% |
| Potion: | 43.6% | 64.2% |
| Storeroom: | 43.6% | 59.7% |
| Moat: | 43.5% | 66.7% |
| Graverobber: | 43.3% | 51.9% |
| MarketSquare: | 43.2% | 60.5% |
| Caravan: | 43.2% | 69.2% |
| Island: | 43% | 57.9% |
| Lookout: | 42.7% | 64.6% |
| Smugglers: | 42.6% | 61.6% |
| Cutpurse: | 42.6% | 56.5% |
| Cache: | 42.5% | 46.4% |
| Harvest: | 42.2% | 71.4% |
| YoungWitch: | 42% | 64.7% |
| Advisor: | 41.6% | 64.4% |
| Alchemist: | 41.6% | 71.4% |
| Silver: | 41.5% | 54.8% |
| Golem: | 41.5% | 58.9% |
| Soothsayer: | 41.5% | 57.4% |
| TreasureMap: | 41.4% | 54% |
| Bishop: | 41.3% | 61% |
| Curse: | 41.3% | 54.3% |
| Feodum: | 41.2% | 55.4% |
| Trader: | 41% | 66.7% |
| DeathCart: | 41% | 56.8% |
| Develop: | 40.9% | 63% |
| Tunnel: | 40.8% | 62.5% |
| SpiceMerchant: | 40.7% | 63.2% |
| Pillage: | 40.7% | 60.3% |
| Rats: | 40.5% | 46.5% |
| Oasis: | 40.4% | 56.2% |
| Spy: | 40.3% | 53.1% |
| SilkRoad: | 40.2% | 43.3% |
| Philosopher'sStone: | 39.3% | 53.1% |
| SecretChamber: | 38.8% | 50% |
| Forager: | 38.7% | 52% |
| Forge: | 38.2% | 57.6% |
| Jester: | 38% | 59.4% |
| NobleBrigand: | 37.7% | 47.3% |
| Talisman: | 37.5% | 53.3% |
| Transmute: | 36% | 60.9% |
| Saboteur: | 35.9% | 50.9% |
| Thief: | 35.7% | 38.9% |
| Scout: | 35.6% | 62.9% |
| University: | 33.1% | 41.1% |
| Coppersmith: | 32.5% | 54.2% |
| Tribute: | 31.1% | 54.1% |
| PirateShip: | 24.3% | 46.4% |
Card All Top 20 Diff
Thief 0.357 0.389 0.032
University 0.331 0.411 0.080
SilkRoad 0.402 0.433 0.031
Cache 0.425 0.464 0.039
PirateShip 0.243 0.464 0.221
Rats 0.405 0.465 0.060
NobleBrigand 0.377 0.473 0.096
My winrate in Urchin mirrors is 63%, guess I'm just very lucky when it comes to colliding them!
SilkRoad 0.402 0.433 0.031
It's lower by about 5%. The thing you have to realize, though, is that just because a card is swingy doesn't mean there can't also be some skill. Clearly there is some skill with the card, it's not 'roll a die, if you get higher you win'. We had the same discussions with Tournament (though I think Urchin is worse). And SCSN deals with the card better.My winrate in Urchin mirrors is 63%, guess I'm just very lucky when it comes to colliding them!
Is that higher or lower than your overall winrate?
SilkRoad 0.402 0.433 0.031
I think this will be because if Silk Road is good it can be mirrored.
Or at least a few will be denied.
So a lot of the time if you are the only player to buy one, it was a late game $4 hand that you wish was a duchy.
The thing about SR in high-level games is, it's a card you often go to if you're way behind. "I'm very far behind - if I'm going to win, it will have to go long enough for SR to be good (better than duchy anyway), so SR it is". Desperation moves are going to look bad, even if they may up your winrate in the situation you get them.
It's lower by about 5%. The thing you have to realize, though, is that just because a card is swingy doesn't mean there can't also be some skill. Clearly there is some skill with the card, it's not 'roll a die, if you get higher you win'. We had the same discussions with Tournament (though I think Urchin is worse). And SCSN deals with the card better.
Quote from: Wandering WinderThe thing about SR in high-level games is, it's a card you often go to if you're way behind. "I'm very far behind - if I'm going to win, it will have to go long enough for SR to be good (better than duchy anyway), so SR it is". Desperation moves are going to look bad, even if they may up your winrate in the situation you get them.
Yes, this. I've been trying to think up a way to account for this. Something I'm considering is establishing an arbitrary turn limit, like, only counting cardS purchased before turn 10 or something. I *think* this should sufficiently account for deliberate strategies, and weed out ad hoc desperation tactics. Thoughts?
SilkRoad 0.402 0.433 0.031
I think this will be because if Silk Road is good it can be mirrored.
Or at least a few will be denied.
So a lot of the time if you are the only player to buy one, it was a late game $4 hand that you wish was a duchy.
Card All Top20 Diff
Swindler 0.474 0.652 0.178
Bank 0.463 0.653 0.190
Duchess 0.494 0.653 0.159
PearlDiver 0.498 0.654 0.156
Remodel 0.472 0.654 0.182
Mystic 0.509 0.655 0.146
BandofMisfits 0.478 0.658 0.180
Woodcutter 0.474 0.661 0.187
CandlestickMaker 0.519 0.662 0.143
Haggler 0.478 0.662 0.184
Ill-GottenGains 0.545 0.663 0.118
Smithy 0.461 0.664 0.203
BanditCamp 0.512 0.667 0.155
Fortress 0.483 0.667 0.184
JunkDealer 0.497 0.667 0.170
Moat 0.435 0.667 0.232
Scavenger 0.506 0.667 0.161
Trader 0.410 0.667 0.257
WanderingMinstrel 0.516 0.667 0.151
Worker'sVillage 0.498 0.667 0.169
Gold 0.468 0.669 0.201
Harem 0.499 0.671 0.172
Quarry 0.505 0.674 0.169
Masterpiece 0.606 0.676 0.070
Venture 0.487 0.677 0.190
Copper 0.520 0.678 0.158
Torturer 0.484 0.679 0.195
Altar 0.513 0.680 0.167
Mandarin 0.455 0.680 0.225
Cellar 0.441 0.681 0.240
FishingVillage 0.495 0.681 0.186
Watchtower 0.493 0.681 0.188
Highway 0.505 0.683 0.178
Marauder 0.445 0.683 0.238
Embassy 0.517 0.685 0.168
TradingPost 0.497 0.687 0.190
Crossroads 0.523 0.688 0.165
Embargo 0.466 0.689 0.223
WishingWell 0.575 0.690 0.115
Card All Top20 Diff
Trader 0.410 0.667 0.257
Cellar 0.441 0.681 0.240
Marauder 0.445 0.683 0.238
Moat 0.435 0.667 0.232
Mandarin 0.455 0.680 0.225
Embargo 0.466 0.689 0.223
Smithy 0.461 0.664 0.203
Gold 0.468 0.669 0.201
Torturer 0.484 0.679 0.195
Venture 0.487 0.677 0.190
Card All Top20 Diff
Colony 0.786 0.935 0.149
Goons 0.682 0.875 0.193
Province 0.667 0.853 0.186
Butcher 0.674 0.853 0.179
Platinum 0.593 0.818 0.225
City 0.495 0.809 0.314
Mountebank 0.602 0.807 0.205
BorderVillage 0.581 0.804 0.223
Vineyard 0.653 0.802 0.149
Tournament 0.485 0.800 0.315
That sounds right to me. Do you have a Pirate Ship theory that fits the data?
Copper (?)I guess this would be mostly Goons, and also people buying random copper on the winning turn.
Good point; it still is below .500, so the "F it, I'm going Pirate Ship, Arrr!" Theory is good. Less good players are probably acquiring it for very different reasons.That sounds right to me. Do you have a Pirate Ship theory that fits the data?My guesses for this are: small sample size, fun, testing or learning.
Goons was my best guess, too, except I would have thought most Top20 games would have been Goons mirrors, where copper buying is not unheard of. But you're right that these could be last turn buys of (say) 11 Coppers to gain 44 VP or something.Copper (?)I guess this would be mostly Goons, and also people buying random copper on the winning turn.
The all data will also be dragged down by new players using up all the buys.
Good point; it still is below .500, so the "F it, I'm going Pirate Ship, Arrr!" Theory is good. Less good players are probably acquiring it for very different reasons.That sounds right to me. Do you have a Pirate Ship theory that fits the data?My guesses for this are: small sample size, fun, testing or learning.Goons was my best guess, too, except I would have thought most Top20 games would have been Goons mirrors, where copper buying is not unheard of. But you're right that these could be last turn buys of (say) 11 Coppers to gain 44 VP or something.Copper (?)I guess this would be mostly Goons, and also people buying random copper on the winning turn.
The all data will also be dragged down by new players using up all the buys.
Would have been cooler if it were due to some trippy Coppersmith megaturn engine, but speaking of small sample sizes...
Expressicist: what are the sample sizes of the game base you are working with?
Do those stats take into account that the number of cards you draw depends on how you open? So Silver-Silver is drawn less than Silver-smithy because your smithy might help draw your silver?
Do those stats take into account that the number of cards you draw depends on how you open? So Silver-Silver is drawn less than Silver-smithy because your smithy might help draw your silver?
It simply looks for if you played one or both of the cards you opened with on or before T4. So, for example if you open Smithy-Silver, you're guaranteed to play both.
Do those stats take into account that the number of cards you draw depends on how you open? So Silver-Silver is drawn less than Silver-smithy because your smithy might help draw your silver?
It simply looks for if you played one or both of the cards you opened with on or before T4. So, for example if you open Smithy-Silver, you're guaranteed to play both.
If you open double terminal and they collide, that's not the same luck of the draw as having one miss the shuffle. And another factor is that you might choose not to play a drawing action you opened with so that it doesn't trigger a bad shuffle.
Side note, you aren't guaranteed to see both Silver and Smithy if smithy is at the bottom of your deck.
You know, I'm not really sure which is better on average, 5/2 or 4/3. What you just posted suggests 5/2, and I guess that's about right. Can you just look at which opening split is better?
Update:
There have been a few requests for additional data and I've done some more research that I wanted to share but I don't want to create yet another thread. I'll update this first post with additional data as I collect it.