[NFP] Fewer than 40% of players have a won a game - RE-REVISITED

[Loderingo]

In January 2018 I did a post looking at the number of people who have won the game from the Steam global achievement stats. I revisited in this March 2019 and thought it would be another good time to take a look and see what has changed

Victory by difficulty

Jun 2020 (Mar 2019) ((Jan 2018)) Delta 2020-2018

Settler or higher – 42.6% (41.8%) ((39.3%)) Δ +3.3%
Chieftain or higher – 37.4% (35.9%) ((34.3%)) Δ +3.1%
Warlord or higher – 34.8% (33.2%) ((31.7%)) Δ +3.1%
Prince or higher – 31.5% (29.8%) ((28.3%)) Δ +3.2%
King or higher – 15.3% (14.3%) ((13.6%)) Δ +1.7%
Emperor or higher – 9.5% (8.5%) ((8.0%)) Δ +1.5%
Immortal or higher – 6.5% (5.7%) ((5.4%)) Δ +1.1%
Deity – 5.4% (4.7%) ((4.5%)) Δ +0.9%

It is now over 40% who have won a game but the main increase has been at Prince level. In two years only an extra 1% of players have won the game on Deity

It is worth noting that the highest % achievement (for having 6 improvements) is still only at 85.2% (85.4%) ((81.1%)) so there are still about 15% of purchasers who haven’t properly played the game

Victory by type

Jun 2020 (Mar 2019) ((Jan 2018)) Delta 2020-2018

Science – 23.5% (21.9%) ((19.5%)) Δ +4.0%
Culture – 23.0% (22.6%) ((21.5%)) Δ +1.5%
Domination – 21.7% (21.2%) ((18.3%)) Δ +3.4%
Religion – 10.6% (9.7%) ((8.7%)) Δ +1.9%
Diplomacy – 4.3% (1.3%) Δ +3.0%

The percentage winning all victory types has increased in the last two years, but Science has seen the biggest increase and has overtaken Culture. I think the changes to boost production have made SV easier


Vanilla civs

Jun 2020 (Mar 2019) ((Jan 2018)) Delta 2020-2018

Rome – 11.1% (11.0%) ((10.8%)) Δ +0.3%
Germany – 10.0% (9.4%) ((8.7%)) Δ +1.3%
China – 9.2% (8.1%) ((7.3%)) Δ +1.9%
America – 8.9% (8.4%) ((8.0%)) Δ +0.9%
Japan – 7.5% (7.0%) ((6.8%)) Δ +0.7%
Russia – 7.5% (6.7%) ((6.3%)) Δ +1.2%
Sumeria – 6.9% (7.3%) ((6.3%)) Δ +0.6%
Egypt – 6.8% (7.0%) ((6.3%)) Δ +0.5%
Victoria – 6.6% (6.2%) ((5.8%)) Δ +0.8%
Catherine – 6.2% (6.1%) ((5.7%)) Δ +0.5%
Aztec – 5.4% (5.1%) ((4.7%)) Δ +0.7%
Scythia – 5.4% (5.2%) ((5.2%)) Δ +0.2%
Pericles – 5.3% (4.9%) ((4.4%)) Δ +0.9%
Gorgo – 5.2% (5.0%) ((4.7%)) Δ +0.5%
Kongo – 5.2% (5.2%) ((5.0%)) Δ +0.2%
Arabia – 4.5% (4.4%) ((4.3%)) Δ +0.2%
Norway – 4.4% (4.1%) ((3.9%)) Δ +0.5%
Brazil – 4.3% (4.0%) ((3.7%)) Δ +0.6%
Gandhi – 3.8% (3.5%) ((3.5%)) Δ +0.3%
Spain – 3.6% (3.4%) ((3.2%)) Δ +0.4%

China, Germany and Russia have seen the biggest increases in their victory %, perhaps driven by new purchases in these countries and China has moved up to the 3rd spot. At the other end Scythia, Kongo and Arabia have hardly seen any increase in two years. Even Rome hasn’t seen much of an increase, despite being at the number one spot

DLC civs

Jun 2020 (Mar 2019) ((Jan 2018)) Delta 2020-2018

Australia – 4.2% (3.7%) ((2.8%)) Δ +1.4%
Macedon – 3.1% (2.4%) ((1.7%)) Δ +1.4%
Nubia – 2.6% (2.1%) ((1.4%)) Δ +1.2%
Poland – 2.5% (2.2%) ((1.9%)) Δ +0.6%
Persia – 2.3% (1.8%) ((1.3%)) Δ +1.0%
Indonesia – 1.9% (1.4%) (0.6%)) Δ +1.3%
Khmer – 1.5% (1.0%) (0.5%)) Δ +1.0%

All the DLC civs have seen reasonable increases in their win % except Poland, which has been overtaken by Nubia

Rise and Fall civs

Jun 2020 (Mar 2019) Delta 2020-2019

Korea – 4.4% (3.1%) Δ +1.3%
Cree – 2.6% (2.1%) Δ +0.5%
Netherlands – 2.4% (1.8%) Δ +0.6%
Scotland – 2.4% (1.8%) Δ +0.6%
Mongolia – 2.1% (1.5%) Δ +0.6%
Zulu – 1.7% (1.2%) Δ +0.5%
Mapuche – 1.3% (0.9%) Δ +0.4%
Georgia – 1.2% (0.8%) Δ +0.4%
Chandragupta – 1.1% (0.7%) Δ +0.4%

Korea continues to power ahead and has now overtaken all of the DLC civs and some of the vanilla civs. At the other end Mapuche, Georgia and Chandragupta were bottom of the pile until the release of New Frontiers

Gathering Storm civs

Jun 2020 (Mar 2019) Delta 2020-2019

Eleanor – 2.9% (0.9%) Δ +2.0%
Maori – 2.2% (0.8%) Δ +1.4%
Sweden – 2.0% (0.8%) Δ +1.2%
Inca – 1.9% (0.8%) Δ +1.1%
Canada – 1.7% (0.6%) Δ +1.1%
Mali – 1.5% (0.5%) Δ +1.0%
Ottomans – 1.5% (0.5%) Δ +1.0%
Hungary – 1.4% (0.5%) Δ +0.9%
Phoenicia – 1.4% (0.5%) Δ +0.9%

The GS civs have all seen strong increases in the past year. Eleanor continues to lead the way, although her achievement covers both England and France. At the other end, Hungary is slightly behind despite being seen as a top tier civ. This may be due to the fact that Prince level players don’t know how to levy effectively


New Frontiers civs

Jun 2020

Gran Colombia – 0.5%
Maya – 0.4%


A month after launch the first 2 NF civs are down the lower end of where the GS civs were at the same time, despite Gran Colombia being very overpowered. It may be that players are waiting to see what other content is in NF before jumping in or it may be due to the global economic situation.

Adding up the win % for each leader, I make it that of the 42% who have won the game it works out at an average of about 4 wins each (up from 3 wins each last year!)

The highest scenario win % is 1.3% for Stanislaw Potocki in Jadwiga’s legacy, while 2.2% have claimed a supply drop in the Red Death

 

[xxhe]

Very good and interesting analysis. Thanks Loderingo!

So the case of Gran Colombia and Maya (0.5% - 0.4%) suggests that the power of a civ plays something on player's choice, but no that much. We need to wait and see more players finishing a game to draw a conclusion, though.

 

[Noble Zarkon]

Really interesting, appreciate your hard work pulling this together.

 

[trev1972]

Interesting read - thanks.
I guess a lot of people get gifted the game and dont play it.

It looks like the majority of those who do play the game never go above prince?

 

[rlw33]

Just out of curiosity, i'm assuming that the lost category includes people who did not finish the game because they'd effectively won but but couldn't be bothered clicking the next button until the victory screen?
In which case aren't the "won games" slightly misleading?

 

[Uberfrog]

Nice work! But an important note that your Δ values are in percentage points, not percentages.

It’s not quite accurate to say that the smallest increase was at Deity difficulty— in fact an increase from 4.5% of players in 2018 to 5.4% in 2020 is a proportional increase of at least 20%. We don’t know the exact value as the number of players will have increased since 2018, but in any case 5.4% of a larger number is somewhat higher than 4.5% of a smaller number.

 

[JJOne]

Victory by type

Jun 2020 (Mar 2019) ((Jan 2018)) Delta 2020-2018

Science – 23.5% (21.9%) ((19.5%)) Δ +4.0%
Culture – 23.0% (22.6%) ((21.5%)) Δ +1.5%
Domination – 21.7% (21.2%) ((18.3%)) Δ +3.4%
Religion – 10.6% (9.7%) ((8.7%)) Δ +1.9%
Diplomacy – 4.3% (1.3%) Δ +3.0%

The percentage winning all victory types has increased in the last two years, but Science has seen the biggest increase and has overtaken Culture. I think the changes to boost production have made SV easier

No, it's the rock bands. Before GS, if you simply dominated the game and sort of also used your archaelogists, culture was almost always quicker than science. After GS, the accidental victory gets to be diplomacy, if you happen to vote a lot like the other civs. (Diplo rose also the most in your table, since it was 0% in Jan 18)

 

[King Rad]

I find your percentages won by civ type interesting. I have won a victory with each civ because I don't pick a civ and then play it exclusively or because i prefer a specific style. I'll admit i generally play as a peaceful expansionist, regardless of which civ i'm playing, and i don't take over city states, even if that's one of the traits/strengths of the civ i'm playing. I like playing each one just for fun - no min/maxing, etc. And I enjoy seeing the different abilities of the different civs, although I don't always play properly to their strengths [I have a note in my spreadsheet, where I track games, stating I need to replay Phillip and Spain again since I never started a religion in that game!]. But I can't help but wonder how many people limit themselves to one or a few civs. Again, nice work pulling this all together.

 

[AsH2]

I find your percentages won by civ type interesting. I have won a victory with each civ because I don't pick a civ and then play it exclusively or because i prefer a specific style. I'll admit i generally play as a peaceful expansionist, regardless of which civ i'm playing, and i don't take over city states, even if that's one of the traits/strengths of the civ i'm playing. I like playing each one just for fun - no min/maxing, etc. And I enjoy seeing the different abilities of the different civs, although I don't always play properly to their strengths [I have a note in my spreadsheet, where I track games, stating I need to replay Phillip and Spain again since I never started a religion in that game!]. But I can't help but wonder how many people limit themselves to one or a few civs. Again, nice work pulling this all together.

I've multiple victories with some civs because I've limit myself to let RNG pick.

 

[Loderingo]

Nice work! But an important note that your Δ values are in percentage points, not percentages.

It’s not quite accurate to say that the smallest increase was at Deity difficulty— in fact an increase from 4.5% of players in 2018 to 5.4% in 2020 is a proportional increase of at least 20%. We don’t know the exact value as the number of players will have increased since 2018, but in any case 5.4% of a larger number is somewhat higher than 4.5% of a smaller number.

Yes you are quite correct about it being percentage points. I suppose the question is whether you would expect the number to have increased further bearing in mind this game is coming up to 4 years old now. It's probably true that some players bought the game, played it once and never picked it up again or found the vanilla AI too bad BUT you would expect some of these players to try the game again over the years and for new players to come along. 22.5% of players have achieved an heroic age, which means they must have R&F and 9.1% have achieved all the techs in the future era, which means they must have GS

I find your percentages won by civ type interesting. I have won a victory with each civ because I don't pick a civ and then play it exclusively or because i prefer a specific style. I'll admit i generally play as a peaceful expansionist, regardless of which civ i'm playing, and i don't take over city states, even if that's one of the traits/strengths of the civ i'm playing. I like playing each one just for fun - no min/maxing, etc. And I enjoy seeing the different abilities of the different civs, although I don't always play properly to their strengths [I have a note in my spreadsheet, where I track games, stating I need to replay Phillip and Spain again since I never started a religion in that game!]. But I can't help but wonder how many people limit themselves to one or a few civs. Again, nice work pulling this all together.

That's an interesting thought. I would have thought it would get boring playing the same civ constantly but I guess some people must like it.

 

[PhilBowles]

Yes you are quite correct about it being percentage points. I suppose the question is whether you would expect the number to have increased further bearing in mind this game is coming up to 4 years old now. It's probably true that some players bought the game, played it once and never picked it up again or found the vanilla AI too bad BUT you would expect some of these players to try the game again over the years and for new players to come along. 22.5% of players have achieved an heroic age, which means they must have R&F and 9.1% have achieved all the techs in the future era, which means they must have GS

Most of those would presumably be among the 40% who have won the game - in particular it's very hard to have got all future techs without having won the game at least once. That the figures for expansion content are this low (supported by the low proportions of wins with expansion and DLC civs, as well as the low proportion of diplomatic victories) suggests that the game may have struggled to pick up new players with the expansions.

 

[Socrates99]

Just out of curiosity, i'm assuming that the lost category includes people who did not finish the game because they'd effectively won but but couldn't be bothered clicking the next button until the victory screen?
In which case aren't the "won games" slightly misleading?

I'd assume that would be a pretty tiny group. Deciding the game's all wrapped up is something people do after they've won a few times. Hard to imagine doing that from day one.

 

[jasper]

Post like this are really interesting. Steam stats were taken from another game, pillars of eternity, that also revealed surprising conclusions. Very few people finish the game even on easy levels etc.

Im surprised to see religious vixtory so low. In my limited experience it is very easy to accomplish and quickly. Must be so boring as to not have repeat customers.

 

[IMADAJ]

Just out of curiosity, i'm assuming that the lost category includes people who did not finish the game because they'd effectively won but but couldn't be bothered clicking the next button until the victory screen?
In which case aren't the "won games" slightly misleading?

Not sure about other people, but I know I like to get that 1st win in before shortcutting the ending, and even then I usually let it play out

 

[Breadsmith]

There was a game on steam where only abput 70% of owners even played the game. I can't remember which, but the number of people that own but never play could easily skew the numbers.

I remember having a free copy of Civ5 that took me over a year to offload. Everybody and their mother had a copy.

 

[PhilBowles]

Post like this are really interesting. Steam stats were taken from another game, pillars of eternity, that also revealed surprising conclusions. Very few people finish the game even on easy levels etc.

Im surprised to see religious vixtory so low. In my limited experience it is very easy to accomplish and quickly. Must be so boring as to not have repeat customers.

Certainly I find religious victory very boring. But I suspect the main reason is that it's largely unrelated to the rest of the game - you need to actively go for religion and spread it to get a religious victory, while science and culture can happen naturally with normal gameplay. Domination needs to be actively achieved, but it still uses units that you'll be building anyway. You can go entire games (and I usually do) without building religious units.

 

[AmazonQueen]

There will be a proportion of players who are ignored by these stats because they regularly play offline and don't get achievements.

 

[JJOne]

Some might be bugged / wrongly described. My most recent achievement translates like "build 7 other wonders in the same city, after you've built Apadana." There are 7 including Apadana in that city... and I didn't built Apadana, I conquered it.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

thank you for all this work.

Just out of curiosity, i'm assuming that the lost category includes people who did not finish the game because they'd effectively won but but couldn't be bothered clicking the next button until the victory screen?
In which case aren't the "won games" slightly misleading?

yes, certainly.

there are a few problems which we cannot account for. offline players have already been mentioned. unsure if mods still affect achievements.

 

[WillowBrook]

unsure if mods still affect achievements.

They don't, in general. (Some achievements require that you be playing a "regular game" which means you can't be playing a different ruleset, but most mods don't change the ruleset even if they change numbers, add stuff, etc.)