Since start spots are random within bonuses, players also do not complete bonuses where an opponant starts next to them. That doesn't mean the bonus is not a top pick, just that you couldn't invest armies into taking the bonus while your opp is sitting next to you. This also happens most games.


It's just not that helpful to guid how you'd pick spots. I agree the results would be interesting.

I also think it's Scan/Antartica and Mexico. After that it's the choice 4s: East China/West Russia/E&W Africa.

If you ran this same test on default big world, warlord start spots it would be very predictive and valuable. The start spots are fixed and no wastelands.

This just has too much randomness in it to be predictive. That's what makes the games fun for repetitive play, but it makes data mining mostly unhelpful.

|>"Since start spots are random within bonuses, players also do not complete bonuses where an opponant starts next to them. That doesn't mean the bonus is not a top pick, just that you couldn't invest armies into taking the bonus while your opp is sitting next to you. This also happens most games."

If a there's a spot that would otherwise be powerful, but often has opponents starting right next to it, then that is just another factor affecting the value of the bonus. I don't know why we would want to exclude that information.

I think the wastelands will actually throw the chances of the higher territ bonuses down some, considering that those bonuses have a higher chance of having wastelands in them overall..

ofc' my vote is Mex-Ant-Scand for best, in that order, and worst Being Ant-ME-C.Rus

Leave it to Perrin to put the same bonus in both his "best" list and "worst" list.

I recorded the number of times each bonus was occupied after territory selection, and the number of times that the player won the game when choosing that territory.

Does "occupied" mean they completed the bonus or they picked the spot?

The suspense is killing me.

|>"Does "occupied" mean they completed the bonus or they picked the spot?"

It just means that they occupied a single territory in that bonus after territory selection. I didn't say "picked" because picking a territory does not ensure that you will receive it.

|>"I think the wastelands will actually throw the chances of the higher territ bonuses down some, considering that those bonuses have a higher chance of having wastelands in them overall.."

Since I am ranking by winning percentage *when occupied*, not overall winning percentage, this shouldn't matter.

|> Since I am ranking by winning percentage when occupied, not overall winning percentage, this shouldn't matter.

It should matter a little. The more territories in a bonus, the more likely it is to have a wasteland. Bonuses with wastelands are less likely to be picked. Therefore, bigger bonuses are more affected by wastelands than smaller ones.

Yes, but it will affect how often that bonus is picked -- but it will not affect winning percentage when that bonus is picked, which is what I am using as my ranking criteria.

Sorry, ignore the first "but" which is making my previous post sound odd. Should have said this:

Yes, but it will affect how often that bonus is picked -- but it will not affect winning percentage when that bonus is picked, which is what I am using as my ranking criteria.

I'm a moron. Didn't remove the offending word, again:

Yes, it will affect how often that bonus is picked -- but it will not affect winning percentage when that bonus is picked, which is what I am using as my ranking criteria.

-----

By the way, no one has mentioned the best or worst territory yet!

Best territory is India. Worst is Eastern US.

best territory is east africa. worst is central russia.

It's cause you said "occupied" which to mean meant you held the bonus, not the starting spot. Which also explains most of my criticism.

It's probably cuasacus then. Assuming it's weighted. If it's like Fizz said and one guy picks EU (Nuck I'm thinking of you) and wins, and he's the only one who ever picked EU, that means EU is the best because it' resulted in a win 100% of games it was picked. or some similar weird spot picked as a counterpick.

Here's the data. This includes the first 1224 games on the ladder. The numbers have actually changed a bit since I included another 50 games or so after starting this thread. The previous worst bonus is now second worst.


Biggest surprises, to me:
- South Africa being so terrible. I didn't think it was a prime spot, but I wouldn't have guessed it was that bad.
- Caucasus below 40%
- West Russia at number 1

Interesting! South Africa does have a poor income/territories ratio, however I would prefer South Africa to North Africa even though this data shows otherwise.

that data isn't really surprising at all.

|> that data isn't really surprising at all.

I hate to be the one to point it out, but your guesses above were pretty far off :)

personal preference

Favorite, indonesia

Least Favorites, East USA & East Russia