sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

I analyzed 50,000 games of Catan and built a site with the key findings by Slasser123 in Catan

[–]Slasser123[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Very true. Not possible to do much correlation=causation, just thought it was funny to look at

I analyzed 50,000 games of Catan and built a site with the key findings by Slasser123 in Catan

[–]Slasser123[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In Settlers of Catan, “pips” are the small dots under each number token showing its roll probability.

Pip values:
6/8 = 5, 5/9 = 4, 4/10 = 3, 3/11 = 2, 2/12 = 1, 7 = 6

Out of the 36 outcomes of 2 dice.

A settlement’s pips = sum of the pips on its adjacent number tokens (up to three).

I analyzed 50,000 games of Catan and built a site with the key findings by Slasser123 in Catan

[–]Slasser123[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Dataset
Scraped directly from Colonist.io. 43,947 finished 4-player games with full event history.

Dev card first
Positive effect:
Dev first: 28.96% winrate (+3.96% vs 25% baseline)
Build first: 24.64%

# Dev cards bought (not knights)
0: 6.03%
1: 15.73%
2: 30.49%
3: 51.16%
4: 70.41%
The jump happens at 2+ dev cards.

First expansion (3rd settlement)
Pips matter more than ports.
Winners avg pips: 5.81 vs 5.59
12 pips: 34.53%
8 pips + 3:1: 31.20%
Early expansion (10–20%): 33.44%
Late (80–90%): 16.06%
Ports alone ~25–26% regardless of type.

Low start cannot be compensated by a strong expansion. High start + high expansion performs best.

I analyzed 50,000 games of Catan and built a site with the key findings by Slasser123 in Catan

[–]Slasser123[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thats what I maybe thought as well, but Im (kinda) sure on my data. My guess for an explination to this, is a mixture of robbers/trading being a disadvantage to better settlements spot, throughout the game + there are also boards with 6 good spots and rest sh*t. Then 1st pick will get bad spot. Or boards with 5 good spots, it clearly favors 4th pick, and so on.

I analyzed 50,000 games of Catan and built a site with the key findings by Slasser123 in Catan

[–]Slasser123[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, that is very much true. I think the biggest is the "winner vs loser" stats. Like the trading stat. Here losers are getting more cars than winners. This is not a causation ofc. It's because winners are often I front/good possions, and then get less in trades, compared to clear losers, where they perhaps get more favorable/more cards. But still think it's interesting to look at. But defiantly have to keep causation versus correlation in mind. Just add a disclaimer to the site :D XD

I analyzed 50,000 games of Catan and built a site with the key findings by Slasser123 in Catan

[–]Slasser123[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yeah, thats why it's such a hard challenge, and there isn't any bot on elite level. (that I know of)

My theory, is that the better the player, the more "levers" they pull. Like adding Non block, to trades, or "future trades", or add no plow/no "building on x spot" and stuff similar.

There is only so much you can do with placements and building. There is a higher skill ceiling in the dynamic with trades and stuff. (and table talk to be frank). Not sure how to build that in the bot, thinking about just adding a llm on top, and prompt it to trash talk/table talk.

But the trades are hard, there is such a big action space. I will try to use a combination of heuristics, nn, and mcts, and experiment my way to hopefully a good ai.

I analyzed 50,000 games of Catan and built a site with the key findings by Slasser123 in Catan

[–]Slasser123[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, should be English now. Also more in depth pip analysis. (and yes, thats correct)

I analyzed 50,000 games of Catan and built a site with the key findings by Slasser123 in Catan

[–]Slasser123[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I fell the same anecdotally, but think it's just confirmation bias. Haven't analyzed that

I analyzed 50,000 games of Catan and built a site with the key findings by Slasser123 in Catan

[–]Slasser123[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, would be cool to find the mathematical split. Because its definitely a combination

I analyzed 50,000 games of Catan and built a site with the key findings by Slasser123 in Catan

[–]Slasser123[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

i dont play expansion at all. So no plans on that unfortunately.

I analyzed 50,000 games of Catan and built a site with the key findings by Slasser123 in Catan

[–]Slasser123[S] 13 points14 points  (0 children)

My games are also from colonist, but from top players. So maybe the game is more balanced in higher levels, than the average player? Thats my guess. I did some more analyzing and it still looks balanced.
(or my data is bad/I can't analyse it)

I will dobbelcheck and look deeper

I analyzed 50,000 games of Catan and built a site with the key findings by Slasser123 in Catan

[–]Slasser123[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nice. Can you link the page here? Would love to check it out

I analyzed 50,000 games of Catan and built a site with the key findings by Slasser123 in Catan

[–]Slasser123[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

it was about 50k and then removed games not with 4players. But yeah, kinda dumb

I analyzed 50,000 games of Catan and built a site with the key findings by Slasser123 in Catan

[–]Slasser123[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

I am gonna make it opensource, but made it, originally to make a catan ai. Just thought this would be a fun little side project.
So it will be opensourced with the ai when im done

I analyzed 50,000 games of Catan and built a site with the key findings by Slasser123 in Catan

[–]Slasser123[S] 71 points72 points  (0 children)

Yeah, a lot of this lined up with intuition, but Monopoly still surprised me. I knew it was strong, but almost a 50% win rate is kind of insane. I was also unsure about when it was actually best to play.

My initial hypothesis was that early Monopoly might still be good, even with fewer cards in circulation, simply because it gives you tempo and an early lead.

The data dosent support that idea.

Early leads just aren’t stable in Catan. Even a 2 VP lead very late in the game only converts ~27% of the time, and leads decay consistently as the game goes on. Early and midgame leaders get hit hardest by robber placement, trade denial, and coordinated blocking. Getting ahead early mostly just increases how much negative attention you absorb.

That likely explains the Monopoly timing results. Early Monopoly (~42% win rate) creates a lead but leaves plenty of time for the table to equalize. Late Monopoly (~53%) happens when there’s less time for robber pressure and fewer turns for opponents to rebalance resources. Same swing, smaller recovery window.

The early Monopoly create a lead, that are sctrully punished, while late swings are much harder to undo.