Arkham Horror Statistics

Mcflainez, the entries to which the Investigators were supposed to be added (the ones I ntoed in my last post) do not seem to have been updated.

Victimizer wrote:Mcflainez, the entries to which the Investigators were supposed to be added (the ones I ntoed in my last post) do not seem to have been updated.

Hi, I have checked and the entries are there. I don't know why they don't show up on the form page, but for sure they will be taken into account in the statistics.

tibs wrote:

MCFlainez wrote:By the way, as you can see in this picture, I have finally received Kingsport Horror. It fits barely my table! I hope to play the first game this weekend...

Ah, so you were the guy who did the Dunwich non-Euclidean spiral.

Yes, the same one

I hope that it will be the first picture in BGG to get 1000 thumbs up, but it will take a long time yet, we will see...

Ok, that's what counts.

Hi everybody,

Sorry for the lack of news, but at last I have to say that the promised web site is up. It is far from finished,
but, at least, it is something.

http://personales.ya.com/mcflainez/Arkham_Stats/Welcome.html

I will publish new stats next Monday.

Please, keep in mind that the URL will most surely change, so continue checking this thread to see if there are news.

The site look fantastic! Great job!

It's time for updated stats!

Cthulhu, Nyarlathotep and Yig are the most popular GOOs, while Yibb-Tstll is the least preferred one.

GOO / % of sessions
Cthulhu 9.54%
Nyarlathotep 9.54%
Yig 9.54%
Azathoth 8.83%
Shub-Niggurath 7.07%
Hastur 6.36%
Shudde M'ell 5.65%
Yog Sothoth 5.30%
Y'Golonac 5.30%
Abhoth 5.30%
Atlach-Nacha 4.95%
Ithaqua 4.95%
Tsathoggua 4.95%
Glaaki 4.59%
Eihort 4.24%
Yibb-Tstll 3.89%

Y'Golonac is the most dangerous one, while Shub-Niggurath is the easiest for the investigators.

GOO / % of investigator's defeat
Y'Golonac 66.67%
Atlach-Nacha 57.14%
Shudde M'ell 56.25%
Glaaki 53.85%
Eihort 50.00%
Abhoth 46.67%
Tsathoggua 42.86%
Cthulhu 40.74%
Yog Sothoth 40.00%
Yibb-Tstll 36.36%
Hastur 33.33%
Azathoth 32.00%
Nyarlathotep 29.63%
Yig 29.63%
Ithaqua 28.57%
Shub-Niggurath 25.00%

57.24% of the games didn't use an Herald. Among the heralds, this is the popularity chart:

Herald / % of sessions (with herald) being used
The King in Yellow 26.45%
Tulzscha 26.45%
Ghroth 22.31%
The Dunwich Horror 13.22%
The Dark Pharaoh 11.57%

The following combinations of GOOs / Heralds have not yet reported as defeated (and someone has tried):

GOO / Herald
Abhoth The King in Yellow
Cthulhu Ghroth
Eihort The King in Yellow
Glaaki Ghroth
Hastur The Dunwich Horror
Hastur Tulzscha
Shub-Niggurath Ghroth
Shub-Niggurath The Dark Pharaoh
Tsathoggua Ghroth
Tsathoggua The King in Yellow
Y'Golonac Tulzscha

61.48% of the games didn't use a guardian. This is the guardian's popularity chart:

Guardian / % of sessions (with guardian) being used
Hypnos 33.94%
Nodens 33.94%
Bast 32.11%

Around 60% of the games end with investigator victory. The complete breakdown of results is:

Game result / % of sessions
Defeat (During Final Combat) 37.10%
Victory by seals 26.50%
Victory by Final Combat 23.67%
Victory by closing gates 9.89%
Defeat by Forfeit (Game not ended) 1.06%
Defeat by Act III (King in Yellow) 0.71%
Defeat by Earthquake (Shudde M'ell) 0.71%
Defeat by "Joining the Winning Team" 0.35%

Dunwich Horror is the most popular expansion:

Expansions / % of sessions using it:
Dunwich Horror 56.54%
Kingsport Horror 47.70%
The Dark Pharaoh 39.58%
The Yellow King 49.47%

5 investigators seems to be the optimum number for achieving the victory:

number of investigators / % of victories
8 33.33%
7 50.00%
6 50.00%
5 70.83%
4 65.87%
3 58.18%
2 47.92%
1 66.67%

Hi!

Great work on the stats

!

Any chance of getting the number of sessions listed somewhere? As a running counter (increases as sessions are added)?

Heck, even if you could post the # of session used to calculate the percentages each time you post an update, that'd be sweet

!

Dam wrote:Hi!

Great work on the stats !

Any chance of getting the number of sessions listed somewhere? As a running counter (increases as sessions are added)?

Heck, even if you could post the # of session used to calculate the percentages each time you post an update, that'd be sweet !

You are right, I will do that.

The stats above are calculated with an input of 283 sessions.

MCFlainez wrote:The stats above are calculated with an input of 283 sessions.

Cool

!

tibs wrote:I noticed that you updated the form with "Walking the Ley Lines" as a victory condition, and not "Sacrifices to Make." Sacrifices is in and of itself a unique victory condition, while completing Ley Lines doesn't necessarily result in a victory, and if it does it's technically a victory by "all gates closed."

Sorry to get slightly off topic here, but doesn't Walking the Ley Lines state that all open gates are closed? Since all open gates being closed is a victory condition, how does WtLL not result in a victory?

petszk wrote:

tibs wrote:I noticed that you updated the form with "Walking the Ley Lines" as a victory condition, and not "Sacrifices to Make." Sacrifices is in and of itself a unique victory condition, while completing Ley Lines doesn't necessarily result in a victory, and if it does it's technically a victory by "all gates closed."

Sorry to get slightly off topic here, but doesn't Walking the Ley Lines state that all open gates are closed? Since all open gates being closed is a victory condition, how does WtLL not result in a victory?

If I am not wrong, to win by closing gates, you need to:

1) Have no open gates on the board.
2) Have a number of gate trophies equal or bigger than the number of investigators.

Walking the Ley Lines fulfills condition 1, but does not guarantee condition 2.

Please, anybody, correct me if I am wrong.

Regards!

No, you're correct McFlainez. I drew WtLL the other day in a game with my friend, we discussed the feasability of it. WtLL requires the sacrifice of 1 gate trophy at 4 locations. Since we had 4 investigators, that would've meant having a total of 8 gate trophies during the game (4 for WtLL + 4 remaining when WtLL succeedes). We didn't go that route, seemed like a bit too tough a mission. Granted, if going for WtLL, you don't need to necessary seal gates.

If I may, I think you should shorten the investigators to either their names or their occupations. I find it quite a chore reading the list of investigators in other players' games.

Oh, and you might consider including a drop-down for the League scenario used. I'm sure people may find themselves using them long after League play has expired.

MCFlainez wrote:

petszk wrote:

tibs wrote:I noticed that you updated the form with "Walking the Ley Lines" as a victory condition, and not "Sacrifices to Make." Sacrifices is in and of itself a unique victory condition, while completing Ley Lines doesn't necessarily result in a victory, and if it does it's technically a victory by "all gates closed."

Sorry to get slightly off topic here, but doesn't Walking the Ley Lines state that all open gates are closed? Since all open gates being closed is a victory condition, how does WtLL not result in a victory?

If I am not wrong, to win by closing gates, you need to:

1) Have no open gates on the board.
2) Have a number of gate trophies equal or bigger than the number of investigators.

Walking the Ley Lines fulfills condition 1, but does not guarantee condition 2.

Please, anybody, correct me if I am wrong.

Regards!

How embarrassing for me.

I never actually knew about part 2 of the win by closing gates rule.
I've just re-read the rules, and you're right - I don't know how I missed that on all my previous rule readings.

How embarrassing for me.
I never actually knew about part 2 of the win by closing gates rule.
I've just re-read the rules, and you're right - I don't know how I missed that on all my previous rule readings.

Don't be embarrased for that... in my group, we were playing for months (maybe even more than one year), with the "sneak" rule wrong; we didn't know that, while trying to evade a monster, in case you fail the roll, the monster inflicts you damage just as if you failed a combat check. The difference in game's difficulty is big with that rule.

MCFlainez, if you wouldn't mind a tiny bit of editing, looks like I made a fib in a recent session recording. Game vs Yog Sothoth (defeat during final combat) had 4 investigators not 1 (5 listed at the end, and since 1 was devoured...). I think I might've forgotten to change the number from the default 1.

When can we expect new percentages

?

Dam wrote:MCFlainez, if you wouldn't mind a tiny bit of editing, looks like I made a fib in a recent session recording. Game vs Yog Sothoth (defeat during final combat) had 4 investigators not 1 (5 listed at the end, and since 1 was devoured...). I think I might've forgotten to change the number from the default 1.

When can we expect new percentages ?

Hi, don't worry, I have already received some requests to correct data, so I will correct that aswell.

About the new percentages, I will run the reports tomorrow morning (my time zone is GMT+1). Tomorrow or this Friday I would like to include new reports about investigator usage.

Cheers!

Hi,

Fresh stats, calculated using a sample of 337 sessions.

This time the on-going AH League is having a big impact, since Yig and Nyarlathotep are the most popular GOOs right now. Yibb-Tstll and Eihort need more attention...

GOO / % of sessions used
Yig 10.68%
Nyarlathotep 10.09%
Cthulhu 9.20%
Azathoth 8.31%
Hastur 6.53%
Shub-Niggurath 6.53%
Shudde M'ell 6.23%
Y'Golonac 5.64%
Yog Sothoth 5.34%
Abhoth 5.34%
Ithaqua 5.04%
Glaaki 4.45%
Atlach-Nacha 4.45%
Tsathoggua 4.45%
Yibb-Tstll 3.86%
Eihort 3.86%

Y'Golonac is the thoughtest GOO, winning more than six times per ten games.

GOO / % of investigator's defeat.
Y'Golonac 63.16%
Glaaki 60.00%
Atlach-Nacha 60.00%
Shudde M'ell 47.62%
Eihort 46.15%
Abhoth 44.44%
Tsathoggua 40.00%
Yog Sothoth 38.89%
Cthulhu 38.71%
Yibb-Tstll 38.46%
Azathoth 35.71%
Hastur 31.82%
Ithaqua 29.41%
Yig 27.78%
Shub-Niggurath 27.27%
Nyarlathotep 26.47%

40.65% of the games are using Heralds, Tulzscha being the most popular one:

Tulzscha 27.74%
The King in Yellow 27.01%
Ghroth 21.17%
The Dunwich Horror 13.14%
The Dark Pharaoh 10.95%

There are 40 combinations reported of GOO / Heralds. From all this combinations, the most popular is Hastur with the King in Yellow, followed closely by Y'Golonac - Tulzscha and Nyarlathotep - The Dark Pharaoh.

From all this combinations, these are the ones that at least someone has tried but that nobody has been able to defeat:

Abhoth The King in Yellow
Atlach-Nacha The Dunwich Horror
Cthulhu Ghroth
Eihort The King in Yellow
Glaaki Ghroth
Hastur The Dunwich Horror
Hastur Tulzscha
Shub-Niggurath Ghroth
Shub-Niggurath The Dark Pharaoh
Tsathoggua Ghroth
Tsathoggua The King in Yellow

36.80 % of the games used the help of some guardian. This is the breakdown:

Nodens 34.68%
Hypnos 33.06%
Bast 32.26%

Less than 40% of the games end with investigator's defeat. Here is a detailed view of the results:

Defeat (During Final Combat) 36.01%
Victory by seals 27.38%
Victory by Final Combat 23.81%
Victory by closing gates 9.82%
Defeat by Forfeit (Game not ended) 1.19%
Defeat by Earthquake (Shudde M'ell, not during Final Combat) 0.89%
Defeat by Act III (King in Yellow) 0.60%
Defeat by "Joining the Winning Team" 0.30%

But... but... Someone has reported a !!!Defeat by "Joining the Winning Team"!!!! That result was entered by Kormith. Hey, Kormith, is that true? Could you please give us some details about the game? I am asking because that is something I have never seen in all of my games. In fact, people don't even bother... probably that is the reason why I have not seen that. Anyway, congratulations for being the first one reporting that game result!

Dunwich horror is the most common expansion:

Dunwich Horror 57.14%
Kingsport Horror 44.94%
The Dark Pharaoh 38.69%
The Yellow King 45.83%

Now, 4 investigators seems to be the optimum number for achieving the victory:

8 25.00%
7 42.86%
6 59.26%
5 65.52%
4 67.59%
3 57.81%
2 50.88%
1 66.67%

That's all for the moment.

Do you want stats added for the league games? It might skew things a bit.

It would be cool to add a page for 'if you want the best chance of winning use these...' which you could split into sections such as monster, characters, items, tactics etc. I realise that is a lot of work though!

I've just thought of something: It'd be interesting to know how the epic battle variant cards from Kingsport are helping the ancient ones; i.e. how their winning percentages are with and without these cards. It's probably much too late to ad though, so perhaps one could simply check what their percentages are in games using the Kingsport expansion.

Better idea:
Percentage of ancient one wins with base set, base set+single expansion and base+all expansions.

Though really, the stats you offer now are interesting enough, this was just something I suddenly thought of. Thanks again for your work!

Victimizer wrote:I've just thought of something: It'd be interesting to know how the epic battle variant cards from Kingsport are helping the ancient ones; i.e. how their winning percentages are with and without these cards. It's probably much too late to ad though, so perhaps one could simply check what their percentages are in games using the Kingsport expansion.

Better idea:
Percentage of ancient one wins with base set, base set+single expansion and base+all expansions.

The more stats the better as far as I am concerned. A really great thread. My favorite.

I use the undefeated GOOs and heralds combos as next game challenges. Right now 0-2.

As suggested by Victimizer, I have prepared some SQL to extract new data: percentages of victory / defeat based on the number of expansions used. (Defeat means Investigator's defeat).

No Expansions Victory 70.59%
No Expansions Defeat 29.41%

1 Expansion Victory 59.76%
1 Expansion Defeat 40.24%

2 Expansions Victory 68.06%
2 Expansions Defeat 31.94%

3 Expansions Victory 56.36%
3 Expansions Defeat 43.64%

4 Expansions Victory 47.46%
4 Expansions Defeat 52.54%

The difference in difficulty between "no expansions" and "all expansions" is quite big!. I also have breakdowns of the different results depending on the number of expansions:

No Expansions Victory by seals 32.35%
No Expansions Victory by Final Combat 27.94%
No Expansions Defeat (During Final Combat) 25.00%
No Expansions Victory by closing gates 10.29%
No Expansions Defeat by Forfeit (Game not ended) 4.41%

1 Expansion Defeat (During Final Combat) 39.02%
1 Expansion Victory by Final Combat 28.05%
1 Expansion Victory by seals 23.17%
1 Expansion Victory by closing gates 8.54%
1 Expansion Defeat by Act III (King in Yellow) 1.22%

2 Expansion Victory by seals 36.11%
2 Expansion Defeat (During Final Combat) 26.39%
2 Expansion Victory by Final Combat 19.44%
2 Expansion Victory by closing gates 12.50%
2 Expansion Defeat by "Joining the Winning Team" 1.39%
2 Expansion Defeat by Act III (King in Yellow) 1.39%
2 Expansion Defeat by Earthquake (Shudde M'ell, not during Final Combat) 1.39%
2 Expansion Defeat by Forfeit (Game not ended) 1.39%

3 Expansion Defeat (During Final Combat) 41.82%
3 Expansion Victory by Final Combat 27.27%
3 Expansion Victory by seals 23.64%
3 Expansion Victory by closing gates 5.45%
3 Expansion Defeat by Earthquake (Shudde M'ell, not during Final Combat) 1.82%

4 Expansion Defeat (During Final Combat) 50.85%
4 Expansion Victory by seals 20.34%
4 Expansion Victory by Final Combat 15.25%
4 Expansion Victory by closing gates 11.86%
4 Expansion Defeat by Earthquake (Shudde M'ell, not during Final Combat) 1.69%

Thanks for your suggestions, victimizer!

Naw, Thank you for this!

Also: Perhaps the use of epic battle cards could be a choice on the form itself - some people might be using them separate from kingsport, or not at all with Kingsport, and with data on a few games using these, a comparison could be made between the difference in percentage of investigator wins/defeats during final combat with and without the epic battle variant.

*edit*

Also, now that you have a site, I think this thread deserves a sticky. Who would also proclaim this opinion?

Oh and, McFlainez, you could also add your sites' url to the first post, that'd make it easier for new-comers.

*edit*
And I've noticed that on your website, one cannot look at all of the games played. I'm not sure if it is possible to embed the chart a second time so that it displays all of the games the way the google chart in the first post of this thread does, but that would be useful for some people, or at least a link to the entire thing from your website. Not too important minor quibble, but could be useful at some point, also for people that try to interprete the data in other ways than the numerical.

Thanks, MCFlainez! You are the business. However:

MCFlainez wrote:
2 Expansion Defeat by "Joining the Winning Team" 1.39%

This person is arguably more awesome even than you. Has there been a match report?