Hi,

Which of the statistic do you find most helpful analysing 1v1 games?

So far I think cumulative luck is a decent predictor of who is going to win in an even pairing.

Are any of the stats useful to you mid-game?

The only ones I pay any real attention to are 'armies actually deployed each turn' and 'player relations' since I feel the latter is the best judge of who has played better.

Luck can be a very deceptive statistic since it is more likely to punish the safer player. If you only do 4v2 attacks you have little opportunity for positive luck but if you constantly do 3v2 you have far higher potential luck.

armies actually deployed is without a doubt is the best and most thing i use. i couldnt be without it!

i rarely use it. i don't really analyse games in that much detail.

Total armies controlled is generally the best measure of who is winning, not just in 1v1, but in all games. It takes into account income, but also player skill in efficiency and warfare. Someone who is able to consistently stay ahead on total troops is the person who wins games.

Luck only works when the pairing is already known to be even, and there are no factors that throw luck out the window (a retreat - > reinforce move where you get a huge kill ratio lead will not move your luck at all, but could be the deciding factor in a game).

All the stats are useful midgame if you have a lower level of fog. I also use the Player Relations page to measure my efficiency in wars, especially in FFAs. It can also be a wakeup call that you are fighting somebody too much when your income is 50 a turn and you've lost and killed a thousand each in a big FFA.

Armies Actually Deployed is the best, but it could be better....

-I'd like to see indicators for when I play cards. Then with games with standard card count, I can use that to see when the enemies are playing cards.

-I'd like to see team totals for gaging who's ahead, rather than a sum of the individuals.

i dont generally use it either