3.2 AI-only Game Statistics

L. Vern · Mar 17, 2023

I bring another stat dump from 150 AI-only games from 3.2, now with policy graphs!
If you would like to contribute your computer to run more games for a larger sample size, please see the instructions at https://github.com/artemigkh/civ5-automation

Spoiler Victory Types :

Spoiler Civilizations :

Civ	Games	Victories	Winrate	Culture Victories	Diplomatic Victories	Science Victories	Time Victories	Domination Victories	Average Victory Score	Average Score Rank	Turn 100 Average Score	Turn 100 Average Rank	Turn 200 Average Score	Turn 200 Average Rank	Turn 300 Average Score	Turn 300 Average Rank	Turn 400 Average Score	Turn 400 Average Rank	Turn 500 Average Score	Turn 500 Average Rank
Austria	26	9	0.35	5	4	0	0	0	1857.62	4.46	372.42	4.08	911.96	4.15	1326.35	4.73	1702.39	5.22	nan	nan
China	33	9	0.27	6	0	3	0	0	1768.82	4.48	397.82	3.24	1034.67	3.36	1627.33	4	1555.63	5.11	1851	5
Brazil	37	10	0.27	8	0	2	0	0	2159.24	4.08	382.05	4.14	960.65	4.32	1609.35	3.97	1910.52	4.24	1562.33	4.33
Germany	24	6	0.25	3	3	0	0	0	1697.62	4.58	348.04	5.08	872.5	4.83	1258.42	4.88	2086	4.42	nan	nan
Indonesia	26	6	0.23	1	1	3	0	1	3005.27	3.19	407.62	3.15	1005.31	3.42	1818.38	3.12	3034.93	3.07	nan	nan
Japan	35	8	0.23	5	0	2	0	1	2482.83	3.66	383.97	3.86	1008.46	3.83	1739.26	3.77	2161.7	4.35	689.5	7.5
Arabia	35	8	0.23	8	0	0	0	0	1191.37	5.51	339.94	5.8	722.63	5.91	975.83	6.11	1142	6.32	1319	4
America	24	5	0.21	3	1	0	1	0	2362.62	3.75	365.46	4.5	1005.58	3.62	1443.17	4.21	2226.5	3.39	5787	1
The Aztecs	29	6	0.21	1	3	0	1	1	3364.66	3	374.14	3.97	1064.38	3.21	1885.72	3.28	3059.95	2.95	4291.67	2
Egypt	28	5	0.18	5	0	0	0	0	1406.68	5.04	355.5	5	861.5	5	1148.14	5.39	1487.41	5.47	865	6
The Iroquois	30	5	0.17	0	3	0	2	0	3396.27	2.9	396.9	3.4	1111.33	3.2	2062.43	3	3480.53	2.65	5911.67	3.33
Songhai	24	4	0.17	0	0	0	1	3	2981.71	3.54	358.17	4.67	1004.17	3.75	1865.38	3.67	2959.33	3.33	4317.5	2
Greece	24	4	0.17	1	2	0	0	1	1630.33	5	380.92	3.62	949.96	4.33	1391.38	5.04	1516.14	5.43	0	9
The Ottomans	32	5	0.16	0	2	2	0	1	2055.31	4.16	356.28	4.78	944.88	4.5	1456.16	4.84	1904.2	4.73	1384.33	5
Ethiopia	32	5	0.16	3	0	2	0	0	1710.19	4.5	402.09	3.19	1001.62	3.88	1440.25	4.34	1785.59	4.53	698	7
Morocco	34	5	0.15	4	1	0	0	0	1651.03	4.74	343.62	5.56	794.56	5.41	1340.56	4.62	1529.68	5.11	1112.25	5.5
Siam	28	4	0.14	3	1	0	0	0	1676.43	4.75	369.36	4.57	841.29	4.96	1280.96	4.89	1705.12	4.76	2830.67	3
The Zulus	29	4	0.14	0	1	0	2	1	2422.21	3.86	333.34	5.83	859.07	5.03	1611.31	3.76	2224.06	3.94	2586.6	4.8
Venice	34	4	0.12	1	1	2	0	0	1673.09	4.65	393.59	3.44	1008.5	3.68	1413.82	4.44	1694.46	4.88	1319	7
India	26	3	0.12	3	0	0	0	0	1574.23	5.04	377.08	3.96	944.04	4.31	1343.08	4.77	1858.67	4.67	nan	nan
The Netherlands	19	2	0.11	1	1	0	0	0	1427.74	5.32	317.42	6.79	793.58	5.84	1118.68	5.84	1154.09	5.82	0	7
Korea	30	3	0.1	3	0	0	0	0	1298.2	5	353.5	5.13	801.1	5.4	1124.7	5.33	1244.47	5.47	284.2	7.2
Persia	31	3	0.1	1	1	0	1	0	1851.71	4.65	352.26	5.13	864.06	5.03	1348.84	4.77	2045.65	4.3	2233.5	3.75
Byzantium	21	2	0.1	0	1	1	0	0	1426.43	4.9	351.05	4.9	851.14	4.9	1239.38	4.81	1384.71	5.64	0	8
Portugal	22	2	0.09	1	0	1	0	0	1265	5.14	363.73	4.73	824.68	5.36	1124.18	5.55	1308.28	5.39	1604	4
Poland	24	2	0.08	2	0	0	0	0	1861.96	4.17	384.46	4.12	953.88	4.08	1339.88	4.58	1671.93	4.8	3046	2
Spain	26	2	0.08	0	0	0	2	0	1642.88	4.96	336.62	5.27	831.54	5.42	1203.77	5.5	1631.8	4.8	6239.5	1
The Maya	26	2	0.08	1	1	0	0	0	1384.23	4.85	391.69	3.54	982	3.81	1248.69	4.77	1286	5.7	nan	nan
England	27	2	0.07	0	2	0	0	0	2230.22	3.74	350.37	4.96	994.93	3.89	1563.15	4.04	2177.5	3.94	5116	2
The Inca	27	2	0.07	0	1	1	0	0	1877.33	4.48	389.04	3.11	930.26	4.04	1410.33	4.67	2092.46	4.31	nan	nan
Sweden	28	2	0.07	1	1	0	0	0	1937.54	4.32	331.86	5.54	817.43	5.29	1457.18	4.18	2129.12	4.24	192.75	6.75
The Celts	28	2	0.07	1	0	1	0	0	1090.61	5.71	367.68	4.29	863.07	5.07	1109.39	5.46	1374.29	5.47	827	7
Assyria	29	2	0.07	2	0	0	0	0	1693.17	4.55	358.76	4.34	887.76	4.93	1328.9	4.83	1555.29	4.88	0	8
Babylon	29	2	0.07	1	0	1	0	0	1195.72	5.59	362.28	4.76	835.79	5.14	985	5.86	955.69	5.94	nan	nan
Carthage	34	2	0.06	1	1	0	0	0	1803.38	4.47	403.74	3.12	998.12	4.03	1522.32	4.38	1670.09	5.26	1147.33	5.67
France	25	1	0.04	0	1	0	0	0	1101.4	5.6	321.52	6.36	741.76	5.72	1082.32	5.52	1012.67	6.08	nan	nan
Russia	28	1	0.04	1	0	0	0	0	1759.07	4.5	393.5	3.39	858.93	4.71	1348.39	4.46	1710.53	4.6	1899	3.5
Rome	30	1	0.03	0	0	0	0	1	2536.83	3.6	417.4	3	1040.93	3.67	1721	3.83	2338.14	3.76	1660	4.67
Polynesia	23	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1989.7	4.22	364.04	4.78	974.3	4	1513.52	4	2105.39	3.67	2504.75	3.25
The Shoshone	24	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1836.29	4.58	373.21	4.33	905.67	4.54	1404.67	4.58	1652.14	5.29	3458	2
The Huns	30	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1510.17	4.9	334.63	5.93	804.6	5.33	1197.33	5.23	1311.87	5.47	nan	nan
Denmark	26	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1468.31	4.81	322.81	6.08	853.65	4.81	1270.42	5.08	1505.77	5.08	1839	3
Mongolia	23	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1365.3	5.26	333.22	5.78	817.26	5.35	1208.3	5.22	1139.73	6	1438	6.33

Spoiler Policy Branch Stats :

Spoiler Policy Branch Adoption Flows :

Spoiler Technology Research Times :

Spoiler List of Games :

VictoryCiv	VictoryType	Turn	Civ1	Civ2	Civ3	Civ4	Civ5	Civ6	Civ7	Civ8
The Netherlands	Diplomatic	394	Japan	Assyria	The Netherlands	The Zulus	Denmark	The Huns	Spain	Germany
America	Cultural	478	The Zulus	Ethiopia	America	France	Siam	Korea	Portugal	Rome
Ethiopia	Cultural	399	Mongolia	Morocco	Songhai	The Huns	Ethiopia	The Maya	Assyria	Spain
Morocco	Cultural	379	Brazil	America	The Inca	China	Spain	Morocco	Byzantium	The Shoshone
Persia	Time	500	Brazil	Persia	Mongolia	Siam	Poland	Ethiopia	China	Carthage
Austria	Diplomatic	389	Russia	Indonesia	Arabia	Sweden	America	Brazil	Austria	The Netherlands
The Aztecs	Time	500	The Aztecs	The Zulus	Sweden	Byzantium	Denmark	Korea	Mongolia	Siam
The Netherlands	Cultural	492	India	Spain	Polynesia	China	France	Mongolia	Arabia	The Netherlands
Venice	Cultural	393	Japan	Siam	Venice	The Shoshone	Morocco	The Inca	Ethiopia	Denmark
Austria	Cultural	402	The Iroquois	Germany	Brazil	China	India	Carthage	The Celts	Austria
The Ottomans	Diplomatic	379	The Ottomans	The Netherlands	Carthage	Poland	Rome	Russia	Mongolia	Babylon
Babylon	Cultural	382	Rome	The Celts	Babylon	Japan	Sweden	Ethiopia	Persia	Arabia
Austria	Cultural	370	Russia	Austria	Spain	Sweden	Brazil	France	Carthage	Greece
China	Science	485	Sweden	China	Poland	The Netherlands	India	Assyria	America	Portugal
Siam	Cultural	401	The Iroquois	Siam	India	Korea	America	Mongolia	Poland	Morocco
Russia	Cultural	338	Russia	France	Byzantium	Indonesia	The Huns	The Aztecs	England	Morocco
Morocco	Cultural	323	Portugal	Carthage	Assyria	Korea	France	The Ottomans	Morocco	Spain
The Aztecs	Diplomatic	490	The Aztecs	Songhai	Spain	Denmark	Rome	Persia	Arabia	Venice
Egypt	Cultural	349	Egypt	Babylon	Assyria	The Maya	The Iroquois	India	Songhai	Venice
Persia	Cultural	445	Persia	The Iroquois	America	The Maya	Siam	Egypt	The Inca	Korea
Arabia	Cultural	484	Greece	Arabia	Brazil	Russia	The Aztecs	Korea	China	The Iroquois
China	Cultural	338	The Huns	Russia	Polynesia	Poland	China	The Inca	Assyria	The Iroquois
India	Cultural	401	Sweden	India	Rome	Persia	Songhai	Ethiopia	China	The Ottomans
Brazil	Cultural	390	Denmark	India	Rome	The Aztecs	Brazil	The Netherlands	The Zulus	Germany
Morocco	Diplomatic	434	Venice	The Shoshone	The Maya	Poland	The Huns	Indonesia	Morocco	The Zulus
The Iroquois	Diplomatic	445	Sweden	Babylon	China	Russia	The Iroquois	Arabia	Austria	The Shoshone
Sweden	Cultural	403	Sweden	America	Persia	Korea	Morocco	Songhai	Austria	The Celts
The Celts	Science	474	The Iroquois	Greece	The Celts	France	Arabia	The Aztecs	Venice	China
The Aztecs	Diplomatic	457	The Aztecs	Japan	Venice	The Ottomans	Egypt	Assyria	Rome	Persia
Brazil	Science	492	Polynesia	France	Ethiopia	Brazil	Austria	Greece	America	England
The Aztecs	Diplomatic	388	The Aztecs	Indonesia	Ethiopia	France	The Ottomans	Songhai	China	Carthage
Carthage	Cultural	429	Carthage	Venice	The Celts	Russia	Siam	Sweden	The Ottomans	Babylon
Venice	Science	499	The Inca	Babylon	Germany	Venice	Morocco	Brazil	Siam	The Iroquois
Greece	Diplomatic	426	Poland	India	Brazil	England	The Aztecs	France	Germany	Greece
Ethiopia	Cultural	364	Songhai	Babylon	Japan	Ethiopia	Korea	The Aztecs	India	Poland
Songhai	Domination	454	Songhai	Carthage	China	Japan	America	England	Ethiopia	India
Arabia	Cultural	455	Arabia	Russia	Egypt	Morocco	Babylon	Polynesia	The Inca	Rome
Ethiopia	Science	458	The Aztecs	Russia	England	Morocco	Arabia	Ethiopia	Japan	Persia
Egypt	Cultural	405	Assyria	Denmark	Egypt	Portugal	The Netherlands	The Ottomans	Korea	Greece
Brazil	Cultural	403	Babylon	The Aztecs	England	The Shoshone	Carthage	France	Brazil	Greece
Arabia	Cultural	352	Carthage	Greece	The Iroquois	Byzantium	Arabia	The Celts	Indonesia	Persia
England	Diplomatic	443	Byzantium	England	The Inca	The Huns	The Zulus	Korea	The Celts	Russia
Japan	Science	435	India	Egypt	The Maya	Byzantium	Greece	The Netherlands	England	Japan
Germany	Cultural	409	France	Spain	Germany	Denmark	Sweden	The Celts	Assyria	Rome
Indonesia	Science	466	Germany	The Huns	The Maya	Portugal	Indonesia	The Aztecs	Arabia	Carthage
Indonesia	Science	427	Japan	Venice	Siam	Austria	Portugal	Indonesia	America	Egypt
The Zulus	Time	500	The Zulus	Venice	The Ottomans	Siam	The Aztecs	Japan	Polynesia	Korea
Carthage	Diplomatic	427	Brazil	Venice	Carthage	Babylon	Austria	Sweden	Byzantium	The Inca
Persia	Diplomatic	448	The Netherlands	Egypt	Persia	Austria	Assyria	Venice	The Celts	Carthage
Greece	Domination	362	Venice	Ethiopia	Denmark	The Inca	Sweden	Mongolia	Arabia	Greece
Venice	Diplomatic	387	Venice	Russia	The Huns	Brazil	France	The Ottomans	Siam	Egypt
Arabia	Cultural	454	The Shoshone	Rome	Siam	Polynesia	The Inca	Arabia	Sweden	Indonesia
Portugal	Cultural	378	Germany	Morocco	England	The Iroquois	Persia	The Huns	Portugal	Rome
Morocco	Cultural	383	Morocco	The Celts	Siam	Venice	Austria	The Iroquois	Babylon	The Ottomans
Japan	Science	496	Poland	England	Polynesia	Arabia	Byzantium	Spain	Japan	The Shoshone
Egypt	Cultural	362	The Celts	England	Russia	Venice	Egypt	France	Songhai	Greece
Japan	Cultural	481	America	Japan	Morocco	The Huns	The Zulus	Ethiopia	England	Spain
Spain	Time	500	The Iroquois	Carthage	Polynesia	Russia	The Shoshone	Morocco	Spain	Arabia
Ethiopia	Cultural	441	Austria	Arabia	Assyria	Indonesia	The Shoshone	Denmark	Ethiopia	The Huns
America	Cultural	395	Germany	Mongolia	The Shoshone	Persia	America	Morocco	Japan	Sweden
The Ottomans	Diplomatic	425	India	Venice	China	Arabia	The Iroquois	The Ottomans	The Celts	Japan
America	Diplomatic	452	The Ottomans	Portugal	Sweden	Mongolia	The Zulus	America	Denmark	China
The Ottomans	Science	401	Portugal	The Huns	Arabia	The Ottomans	Siam	Japan	Brazil	Morocco
Spain	Time	500	Ethiopia	Brazil	Spain	Morocco	Russia	Assyria	The Zulus	Korea
Babylon	Science	466	Greece	Byzantium	Babylon	Morocco	Persia	Songhai	The Netherlands	The Shoshone
Arabia	Cultural	358	Morocco	England	Arabia	Spain	The Maya	The Iroquois	Babylon	Poland
Austria	Diplomatic	407	Greece	Spain	Denmark	Carthage	Morocco	Russia	Arabia	Austria
Byzantium	Science	489	China	Carthage	Brazil	Japan	England	Venice	The Celts	Byzantium
Assyria	Cultural	373	Sweden	Denmark	Poland	England	Persia	The Inca	Assyria	The Huns
China	Cultural	344	China	Austria	Greece	Arabia	Byzantium	The Huns	The Ottomans	The Iroquois
Brazil	Cultural	384	Russia	Austria	The Celts	Brazil	The Maya	The Netherlands	Songhai	Mongolia
Brazil	Cultural	392	Russia	Germany	Babylon	China	The Ottomans	Brazil	Ethiopia	The Zulus
Korea	Cultural	365	Morocco	Siam	Indonesia	Ethiopia	Korea	Denmark	China	The Iroquois
Egypt	Cultural	438	The Aztecs	The Maya	Persia	Egypt	Ethiopia	Babylon	The Huns	Rome
Arabia	Cultural	374	Mongolia	The Ottomans	The Inca	Indonesia	Byzantium	Assyria	Arabia	The Shoshone
India	Cultural	423	Byzantium	Carthage	The Netherlands	Siam	Brazil	India	The Huns	Persia
China	Cultural	348	Denmark	Assyria	The Zulus	Siam	Morocco	The Aztecs	Russia	China
Austria	Cultural	412	Japan	Austria	Poland	Carthage	The Aztecs	Arabia	The Maya	Russia
Germany	Cultural	460	France	Songhai	Denmark	Germany	Venice	Rome	Egypt	Siam
Brazil	Cultural	396	The Inca	The Netherlands	Brazil	Germany	China	Greece	Sweden	Russia
Austria	Diplomatic	440	Persia	Polynesia	Germany	Rome	Denmark	Austria	Sweden	Assyria
Siam	Cultural	351	Denmark	Assyria	The Inca	Brazil	Siam	Spain	The Ottomans	The Aztecs
England	Diplomatic	394	Japan	England	Arabia	Russia	Brazil	Ethiopia	The Ottomans	The Iroquois
France	Diplomatic	458	France	Venice	The Netherlands	Egypt	Carthage	Mongolia	The Shoshone	Korea
Songhai	Time	500	Songhai	The Celts	China	Persia	Sweden	Japan	Poland	Egypt
Japan	Cultural	358	Songhai	Korea	Venice	Morocco	Japan	The Aztecs	America	Egypt
Arabia	Cultural	327	The Zulus	The Inca	Persia	Carthage	The Maya	France	Polynesia	Arabia
China	Cultural	317	Brazil	China	Spain	Polynesia	Japan	France	Rome	Mongolia
The Maya	Cultural	360	China	Sweden	Siam	Russia	Rome	The Maya	Japan	Brazil
Poland	Cultural	487	Poland	Rome	Songhai	Babylon	Denmark	America	Germany	Austria
Egypt	Cultural	421	Persia	China	Songhai	Egypt	Venice	Ethiopia	Poland	Rome
Portugal	Science	498	The Maya	Rome	Arabia	The Huns	Morocco	Portugal	America	The Celts
Venice	Science	440	Persia	Mongolia	Venice	Carthage	Russia	The Shoshone	The Ottomans	The Inca
The Iroquois	Diplomatic	432	Portugal	England	The Iroquois	Assyria	China	Babylon	Siam	Indonesia
The Celts	Cultural	455	The Celts	Greece	The Zulus	The Huns	Portugal	Brazil	The Shoshone	Assyria
Austria	Diplomatic	497	Korea	The Zulus	Indonesia	Sweden	Austria	Brazil	Japan	Mongolia
Japan	Cultural	345	The Ottomans	Carthage	The Zulus	Japan	Morocco	Germany	The Shoshone	Indonesia
Korea	Cultural	362	The Maya	Arabia	Korea	Rome	Carthage	The Huns	China	The Iroquois
The Zulus	Time	500	The Zulus	Persia	Polynesia	The Ottomans	Sweden	Mongolia	Rome	The Celts
Greece	Diplomatic	393	Greece	Mongolia	Germany	Denmark	Korea	The Shoshone	Ethiopia	The Maya
Japan	Domination	384	France	The Celts	Austria	Egypt	Arabia	Rome	Japan	Siam
Germany	Diplomatic	424	Portugal	Carthage	Babylon	Greece	The Huns	Ethiopia	Byzantium	Germany
Indonesia	Cultural	360	The Huns	The Inca	Arabia	The Zulus	Ethiopia	Indonesia	The Iroquois	Mongolia
America	Cultural	451	Persia	America	Korea	The Huns	Germany	Spain	England	Carthage
Siam	Cultural	382	The Shoshone	France	The Celts	Siam	The Iroquois	The Maya	The Zulus	Germany
Germany	Cultural	376	Korea	England	Japan	Germany	Portugal	Egypt	India	The Ottomans
China	Cultural	361	China	The Inca	France	The Shoshone	The Maya	Korea	The Zulus	Ethiopia
Siam	Diplomatic	421	The Inca	Byzantium	Persia	Morocco	India	Siam	The Shoshone	Egypt
Brazil	Cultural	394	Siam	Egypt	The Iroquois	Spain	The Maya	Sweden	The Ottomans	Brazil
The Zulus	Domination	438	The Ottomans	Venice	Spain	The Iroquois	China	Morocco	The Zulus	Babylon
India	Cultural	370	The Celts	India	Egypt	The Netherlands	Babylon	Morocco	Denmark	Poland
Brazil	Science	436	Persia	The Huns	The Celts	Assyria	Denmark	Brazil	Polynesia	Songhai
The Inca	Diplomatic	425	The Inca	Polynesia	Spain	Brazil	Egypt	The Celts	Ethiopia	Assyria
Greece	Cultural	367	Greece	America	India	Persia	The Zulus	Babylon	Denmark	The Huns
Japan	Cultural	366	Mongolia	The Zulus	Austria	Byzantium	India	The Maya	Japan	England
Byzantium	Diplomatic	402	Austria	Byzantium	England	The Aztecs	Portugal	Babylon	Carthage	Siam
Rome	Domination	340	Rome	The Maya	Assyria	Byzantium	Arabia	England	Venice	Denmark
Songhai	Domination	437	Austria	Siam	America	Japan	Portugal	Ethiopia	Songhai	Morocco
Morocco	Cultural	409	The Shoshone	The Aztecs	Polynesia	Venice	Rome	The Inca	Morocco	Brazil
The Inca	Science	440	Portugal	Japan	Brazil	Arabia	The Inca	Indonesia	Babylon	The Iroquois
Austria	Cultural	439	Austria	England	Greece	Byzantium	Mongolia	America	Korea	The Netherlands
The Maya	Diplomatic	418	The Maya	Poland	Carthage	India	France	Rome	Venice	The Zulus
The Aztecs	Domination	412	Poland	Portugal	Brazil	America	Austria	Carthage	The Aztecs	Assyria
China	Science	448	Persia	Russia	The Ottomans	Portugal	China	Venice	The Aztecs	The Iroquois
Ethiopia	Science	452	Greece	India	Persia	The Maya	Ethiopia	Babylon	Japan	Polynesia
The Ottomans	Domination	400	The Ottomans	Ethiopia	The Celts	Spain	Brazil	Indonesia	Egypt	Babylon
The Iroquois	Diplomatic	442	France	Indonesia	Polynesia	The Aztecs	Assyria	Rome	The Iroquois	Japan
The Aztecs	Cultural	491	The Celts	Egypt	The Huns	Poland	Spain	The Aztecs	The Netherlands	England
The Iroquois	Time	500	Carthage	Songhai	Korea	The Iroquois	Persia	Rome	Portugal	The Zulus
Japan	Cultural	335	Mongolia	The Celts	Egypt	India	The Ottomans	Greece	England	Japan
America	Time	500	England	America	The Netherlands	Egypt	Greece	Morocco	The Aztecs	Sweden
Brazil	Cultural	450	Songhai	Korea	The Maya	Brazil	Polynesia	Spain	The Aztecs	Arabia
Germany	Diplomatic	404	Venice	Rome	Germany	Sweden	The Zulus	Assyria	India	Indonesia
Sweden	Diplomatic	429	China	Mongolia	Denmark	Indonesia	Sweden	The Ottomans	Venice	Korea
The Iroquois	Time	500	Brazil	The Ottomans	Rome	Morocco	The Iroquois	Korea	Byzantium	Polynesia
The Zulus	Diplomatic	472	The Zulus	The Celts	The Aztecs	Portugal	Spain	Polynesia	Egypt	Persia
Assyria	Cultural	394	France	Indonesia	Assyria	Carthage	Ethiopia	Brazil	The Shoshone	Denmark
Arabia	Cultural	330	The Netherlands	England	Spain	India	Assyria	The Ottomans	The Huns	Arabia
Indonesia	Science	462	Ethiopia	Indonesia	Poland	Byzantium	Carthage	Songhai	The Huns	Assyria
Poland	Cultural	342	Austria	Persia	India	Indonesia	Poland	The Maya	Babylon	Mongolia
Songhai	Domination	330	Songhai	Polynesia	Venice	Sweden	The Huns	The Celts	India	Arabia
China	Science	474	Polynesia	Japan	Venice	The Inca	China	The Iroquois	Korea	Russia
Indonesia	Domination	445	Japan	India	The Zulus	Russia	America	Indonesia	Ethiopia	Rome
The Ottomans	Science	487	Germany	The Inca	Indonesia	The Ottomans	Poland	Carthage	Songhai	Assyria
Korea	Cultural	366	The Huns	Songhai	Ethiopia	Sweden	Babylon	Egypt	The Ottomans	Korea
China	Cultural	375	The Shoshone	China	Morocco	The Maya	Japan	The Inca	The Huns	Germany
Indonesia	Diplomatic	387	Indonesia	Poland	Korea	Siam	The Zulus	France	Portugal	The Aztecs
Brazil	Cultural	354	Brazil	Arabia	Carthage	The Inca	The Maya	China	America	Greece
Austria	Cultural	486	Spain	Denmark	The Shoshone	Austria	Russia	France	Venice	Babylon
Germany	Diplomatic	389	Carthage	Korea	Polynesia	Poland	Babylon	The Inca	Germany	Venice

ryanmusante · Mar 17, 2023

I apologize if this is a dumb question. Is it a statistical anomaly to see civilizations with 0 wins?

L. Vern · Mar 18, 2023

ryanmusante said:
I apologize if this is a dumb question. Is it a statistical anomaly to see civilizations with 0 wins?

It's not a dumb question at all! Statistics can definitely be tricky to interpret/use correctly, and in this context where there's a ton of factors affecting the end result it's very hard to make any sort of statements with certainty, but i'll try my best to provide an answer

In statististics there's something called the central limit theorem which I've already talked about here so I won't do it again, but the tl;dr is we take 43 samples from the pool of all games (each civ = 1 sample) so by C.L.T these sample means (which are also incidentally effectively winrates) should be normally distributed. One common tool statisticians use to test if a set of data is normally distributed is a Q-Q plot, which you can google if you're curious about it but the tl'dr is close to straight line = normally distributed

Spoiler Q-Q Plot :

as you can see for a 43 point dataset this is pretty decent, so looks like C.L.T was probably right and we can go with the normality assumption. However, the lower tails are outliers and we'll talk about them later.

The civ winrates being normally distributed means that their average performance and corresponding winrates are normally distributed:

Superimposed on the winrate histogram is the N(12.23, 8.37), maximum likelihood estimation (which is just a way of saying that assuming the data was generated by a normal distribution, then these are the parameters under which the observations we see have the highest likelihood of occurring).

We should expect to see a peak in the 10-15 bucket but the sample size is quite low so this is perfectly normal, for example here's a histogram I got from generating 43 random samples from the MLE distribution and bucketing them the same way:

Spoiler Randomly Generated Histogram, Same Distribution :

Anyway, the point is that the process by which the civs were balanced and/or played has a mean that is normally distributed theorem which is reflected in the winrates (i.e. some civs are just imbalanced, or have flavors to more frequently use currently imbalanced stuff, etc.).
Under such a model, we can guesstimate by the green line intercept at 0 that your chance of being such a poor-state civ that you can't win a single game is 1.7% just due to the unluckiness in the factors in the process (i.e just had a ton of bad spawns, were a war-oriented civ in a fragmented water heavy map a few times too many or something, etc), or more formally we can evaluate the cumulative density function at 0 of the MLE distribution to get 1.72%.

This is all fairly hard to interpret, and anyone asserting any kind of authoritative statement from this kind of data is of course not to be trusted, so what can we really say from all of this? I would suggest that civ is a complex game with 8 contenders for a win, so you have to have opportunities in your kit to really stand out, really be powerful (at least in the AIs hands!!! Remember that this translates quite loosely to player balance and should be used more for general trends). So for the civs that do have such a path to victory, their relative strengths and weaknesses in combination with random occurrences in a strength dictated by a bell-curve, whereas those that don't or have one but is weak and outshined by the 1 or 2 other civs also probably popping off, they just lose a lot.

Another way we can approach this statistically is modelling the outcome of each individual game as a binomial outcome. Obviously it isn't a perfect representation of the underlying mechanism but that's the point of a model - it simplifies it while still making good predictions about its outcome. The binomial distribution does great for modelling situations with a binary outcome, even when there's a ton of underlying stuff going on (like the molecules and stuff in a coin being flipped), as over enough runs it averages out. So applying it here and checking the probability of 0 successes for our unluckiest fellow Atilla with 30 games (trials) with a 1/8 chance of winning by chance we get 1.821%. Also quite low, so I would also take this as evidence for this being unlikely from random chance alone and if we don't care about all AIs being able to be win contenders we can just call it an interesting anomaly)

I know I went a bit extra on this explanation but I enjoy explaining stuff I'm interested in and being able to do so in a way that potentially appeals to nerds by it being about their game is great

tl;dr: yes it seems very unlikely from pure chance, probably warrants investigation if we have the goal of having every ai being a win contender

Orange Chainsaw · Mar 18, 2023

With all the fiddly, hard-to-interpret numbers for win rates, I think the major takeaway is still that Culture Victory is the vastly dominant victory type, happening more often than all the other types combined, and earlier than all of them too. Even Domination is happening roughly ~50 turns later on average. Many of the "outlier" top civs in the chart (Brazil, Japan, Austria, Arabia, even China to an extent) benefit greatly from the CV playstyle. Conversely, many civs that we typically think as geared towards other victory types, like Siam (Diplo), Korea (Science) or Assyria (Domination/Science), ended up getting more success with CVs, most likely because they happen so early as to overshadow the intended path they were going for.

Lich_Lord · Mar 18, 2023

I wonder if the difficulty level bonuses the AI receive would change these results. For example if they all got deity AI bonuses whether we'd see any changes besides faster win times.

L. Vern · Mar 18, 2023

Orange Chainsaw said:
With all the fiddly, hard-to-interpret numbers for win rates, I think the major takeaway is still that Culture Victory is the vastly dominant victory type, happening more often than all the other types combined, and earlier than all of them too. Even Domination is happening roughly ~50 turns later on average. Many of the "outlier" top civs in the chart (Brazil, Japan, Austria, Arabia, even China to an extent) benefit greatly from the CV playstyle. Conversely, many civs that we typically think as geared towards other victory types, like Siam (Diplo), Korea (Science) or Assyria (Domination/Science), ended up getting more success with CVs, most likely because they happen so early as to overshadow the intended path they were going for.

To be fair, the situation has gotten better since 2.7, where culture was quite a bit more dominant and domination was practically nonexistent

Spoiler 2.7 :

I think the policy flow graphs show that another reason that CV is quite common is that it has the same policy picks as those games that end with SV: tradition/progress -> Artistry -> Rationalism -> Order/Freedom
When this path provides bonuses that are useful for both kinds of victory types but culture is as you've mentioned easier and comes earlier, it's not too surprising.
@pineappledan also had an intriguing idea, which was that out of the three industrial trees industry, the only one with direct culture bonuses (tourism defense) was the least picked. Rationalism, on the other hand, which left people open to being culturally influenced, was the most picked, which I think could be playing an important role as well

hokath · Mar 18, 2023

the flow charts are gorgeous!
The fact that all time victories start with authority and then usually also imperialism+autocracy suggests to me that these are all pseudo-domination victories.

Fluffball · Apr 12, 2023

Just been mooching around the forums after having a break from the game as it was getting repetitive and hoping to scratch the itch again but seeing this i don't think i will be returning for a while longer as the thing that i found repetitive seems to still be there...The game boils down to a cultural victory or preventing someone else getting it.

For a long time i have started games by picking a random civ and playing to their strengths to mix games up. For the last 6 months before i took a break every single game essentially broke down into two scenarios.
(1) I would go cultural and basically 'next turn' my way to victory as it was so dominant
(2) I go a different victory path and about 1/2 way into the game a cultural civ or civs are really starting to dominate culturally and no matter what i do i cannot overcome their tourism so the only option i have is to go warmonger and take them out. At that point i have basically won the game especially if i had to take out other civs on the way to them so i win by domination

Before the big shake up of culture/tourism victory you used to be able to fight back against tourism by focusing on your culture and and i had many interesting games where i had culture wars but after the shake up even dedicating my whole empire to generating culture wasn't enough to defend from tourism pressure to the extent that it seemed to have no effect at all.

Science victory in particular suffers from the current state of culture/tourism with the problem being evident in the victory time spread where even the AI can achieve a cultural victory long before a science victory is even theoretically possible never mind actually possible and the irony being if there wasn't a particularly cultural civ in a science game i would generally inadvertently win by culture before i could actually win by science.

While i haven't actually played the game in a while it seems evident that culture is still the dominant factor in the game which takes out any sense of variety and thus replayability.

SwirlSlayer · Apr 12, 2023

Fluffball said:
Just been mooching around the forums after having a break from the game as it was getting repetitive and hoping to scratch the itch again but seeing this i don't think i will be returning for a while longer as the thing that i found repetitive seems to still be there...The game boils down to a cultural victory or preventing someone else getting it.

For a long time i have started games by picking a random civ and playing to their strengths to mix games up. For the last 6 months before i took a break every single game essentially broke down into two scenarios.
(1) I would go cultural and basically 'next turn' my way to victory as it was so dominant
(2) I go a different victory path and about 1/2 way into the game a cultural civ or civs are really starting to dominate culturally and no matter what i do i cannot overcome their tourism so the only option i have is to go warmonger and take them out. At that point i have basically won the game especially if i had to take out other civs on the way to them so i win by domination

Before the big shake up of culture/tourism victory you used to be able to fight back against tourism by focusing on your culture and and i had many interesting games where i had culture wars but after the shake up even dedicating my whole empire to generating culture wasn't enough to defend from tourism pressure to the extent that it seemed to have no effect at all.

Science victory in particular suffers from the current state of culture/tourism with the problem being evident in the victory time spread where even the AI can achieve a cultural victory long before a science victory is even theoretically possible never mind actually possible and the irony being if there wasn't a particularly cultural civ in a science game i would generally inadvertently win by culture before i could actually win by science.

While i haven't actually played the game in a while it seems evident that culture is still the dominant factor in the game which takes out any sense of variety and thus replayability.

You may want to look forward to future versions then: a lot of folks in the VP Congress are in favour of reducing tourism, especially from techs like Radio or the Internet. That should reduce Culture Victories by a lot.
https://forums.civfanatics.com/thre...y-reduce-tourism-modifiers-from-techs.683141/

neo_arcadia · Apr 12, 2023

Such an interesting study. Can I ask what the scope is? 8 civ game, standard size map, no policy mixing (I think), is there anything else? Again, such an interesting study

aandrzej · Apr 15, 2023

Wow epic

L. Vern · Apr 17, 2023

neo_arcadia said:
Such an interesting study. Can I ask what the scope is? 8 civ game, standard size map, no policy mixing (I think), is there anything else? Again, such an interesting study

It was run on Communitu map with default settings, emperor difficulty
Advanced game options used:

No ancient ruins
No events
No tech brokering
No tech trading
No research agreements

Also the difficultyMod.xml was slightly altered to give the AI in the "player" slot the same starting bonuses as the other 7 AIs (like starting units and such)

saamohod · Apr 18, 2023

L. Vern said:
No tech trading

No research agreements

May I ask what was the rationale for turning those off?
My guess is that keeping it on (especially research agreements) makes domination victories even less likely because "amiable" civilizations snowball tech-wise due to lotsa agreements with friends.

andersw · Apr 18, 2023

saamohod said:
May I ask what was the rationale for turning those off?
My guess is that keeping it on (especially research agreements) makes domination victories even less likely because "amiable" civilizations snowball tech-wise due to lotsa agreements with friends.

I think default setting is to have them off in VP.

pineappledan · Apr 18, 2023

Does anyone else think it’s kind of telling that the 2nd, 3rd, and 5th ranked civs are the only 3 with WLTKD bonuses in their kits?

amateurgamer88 · Apr 18, 2023

Top Civs in AI-only games will be those with the most consistent bonuses. UA that AIs use well or WLTKD which the AI has no issues achieving will make them better than AIs that must work a lot harder to achieve peak performance.

I see the data collected as good indication of what kits AIs use well and not a good indication of what Civ is OP and which need buffs. We have kits that humans will always go better than AI and, by buffing those kits to help AIs, humans will be nearly unstoppable. There will always be some level of asymmetry.

L. Vern · May 8, 2023

saamohod said:
May I ask what was the rationale for turning those off?
My guess is that keeping it on (especially research agreements) makes domination victories even less likely because "amiable" civilizations snowball tech-wise due to lotsa agreements with friends.

No tech trading: Keeps tech times more consistent and reduces a ton of variability
No research agreements: was one of the most common requests on one of the first iterations of this that I did from the community, also the logic above applies somewhat here too

3.2 AI-only Game Statistics

L. Vern

Warlord

ryanmusante

Emperor

L. Vern

Warlord

Orange Chainsaw

Chieftain

Lich_Lord

Chieftain

L. Vern

Warlord

hokath

Emperor

Fluffball

Prince

SwirlSlayer

Chieftain

neo_arcadia

Warlord

aandrzej

Chieftain

L. Vern

Warlord

saamohod

Deity

andersw

Emperor

pineappledan

Deity

amateurgamer88

Emperor

L. Vern

Warlord

Similar threads