Statistics Addendum!

[Reddawg]

Thanks to a bit of inspiration, the Statistics Department has come up with a novel and ingenious idea: by using the "score" rankings available in the game we are able not only to see the ascent/descent of nations relative to eachother, but also discern which powers are "major powers" and which are "major growers", two new categories that I wish to include... it's very exciting. Without further ado, the latest stats: *note, further details available by request*

MAJOR POWERS: (any nation with 15% more points than the mean):
1. Japan, 41.1% above mean
2. India, 33.6% above mean
3. Greece, 29.1% above mean
4. England, 15.0% above mean

MAJOR GROWERS: (any nation with 2% more growth than the mean):
1. Apolyton, 12.8% above mean
2. India, 3.2% above mean
3. Germany, 3.1% above mean
4. Aztecs, 2.7% above mean
5. Greece, 2.5% above mean
6. China, 2.2% above mean

ANALYSIS:
1. Hail, Pres. WhereItsAt, and the cabinent members of Apolytonia! Our mighty nation is the top major grower (for the 430-210BC period) in the world, with an AMAZING total score growth of 26.6%! Such an achievement is unbelievable, and at this rate our nation could be a major power in an estimated 150 years!
2. As previously forewarned, Germany is the third largest major grower and second only to our nation in this hemisphere.
3. Interestingly the top two major powers in the world are "lost civs", which means the balance of power will shift dramatically once contact is established.


It is the sincerest hope of the Dept. of Statistics that these latest figures will revolutionize not only the government's and the public's view of the usefullness of the statistics department, but also the entire way we think of foreign powers as a threat.

Indeed, it is the wish of this statistician that these rankings become the main determinant of power in our world.

*note: further details and analysis available on request. priority given to Executive Branch, Foreign Affairs, War Ministry, and all others, in that order*

[Apocalypse]

Thanks for all that. What is the growth of the other lost civs? It would be nice to see if there was a war. You don't have to do this now, it would just be interesting to see in the future.

[Shiber]

Hmm... I think the main reason for our large growth rate is that we had a bad start and then we caught up.
Anyway, great reading, very enriching stuff, well written but I have just one question: were the stats about the "lost" civs gathered from the retirement screen? I don't know of any other way to see stats about unknown civs, and unless there is a way other than retiring from the game we can't continue to have statistical reports about the lost civs until we meet them because entering the retirement screens is sortof cheating in a demo game... sorry to break the party guys.

[Reddawg]

Jokes on you Shiber, it's available through the F8 key, not retirement. Therefore not cheating. To answer questions:

@Apoc, it's not much trouble I already have all the stats done. Japan grew 15.7%, good for 7th greatest grower (nearly a major grower!) while Zululand grew a below-the-mean 10.2%, good for 14th greatest grower! Something strange there.

p.s. the smallest grower was America, 1.4% :-D

[Shiber]

Originally posted by Reddawg
Jokes on you Shiber, it's available through the F8 key, not retirement. Therefore not cheating. To answer questions:

Glad to hear that.

[Robber Baron]

Re: Statistics Addendum!

Originally posted by Reddawg
...
1. Hail, Pres. WhereItsAt, and the cabinent members of Apolytonia! Our mighty nation is the top major grower (for the 430-210BC period) in the world, with an AMAZING total score growth of 26.6%! Such an achievement is unbelievable, and at this rate our nation could be a major power in an estimated 150 years!

I hate to say it, because I don't want to sound too polemical, and because I don't want to threadjack here, But you might as well say "Hail, war." We have vaulted into the front ranks of nations principally due to our imperialist, aggressive warmongering. Our "mighty nation" is approaching continental power status because it has been mighty. Food for thought, builders?

[Reddawg]

I assure you that the 26.6% growth rate is not due to the capturing of French territory. Those gains came in the last couple of decades and hence have not factored into the scores enough to account for such an enormous growth. The growth is truly a compendium of many facets of society.

We have a long, long way to go before coming a major power, though.

[Shiber]

Score is based upon the size of our nation's territory, the number of happy and content citizens and the amount of future techs we have (currently none, lol).
Apolytonia is the first nation that has ever gone to a major war (except maybe one of the lost civs). We've won two wars so far (though the latter was a recent victory and had little effect on our nation's score as Reddawg explained) and have grown greatly in population and territory as a result, and the rate of growth of our score reflects that.
It does not necessarily mean we are "mighty". Technically, a civ can have lots of score with tons of towns sitting on unproductive land with no infrastructure whatsoever.
It was a good decision to strike the Americans and the French early in the game, and it paid off. Now that we have a large territory, all the available resources and two luxuries (soon) it is time to invest in infrastructure so we can fund our next major war. We should not go to another major war (finishing the Americans doesn't count as a major war since they're very weak and won't need a lot of troops or other resources to take them out) until we've built up our infrastructure in terms of improvements and buildings (especially marketplaces and libraries).
That's my 1.25 cents.

[Reddawg]

Shiber I agree except on one point. A country can't have a large score with no infrastructure. A large amount of the score is derived, as you pointed out, by the citizens. Without any infrastructure there will be fewer, and unhappier, citizens. Not to mention that without culture the borders will not expand and the other main component of score, the land area, will not grow. That's why I think that this new system I've come up with is the best one for truly quantifying the relative "power" of nations.

[Shiber]

Technically it can, if it's situated on flood plains and builds towns 4 tiles away from one another (so their cultural borders connect, adding more tiles to the civ's territory). I know it's not very practical, that's why I said technically.
Anyway, you must agree that you cannot determine the strength of a nation or its ability in battle (especially in long wars) just by looking at their scores over the years. Still I think your analysis was very good and contributes a lot to the understanding of our progress and the progress of other nations.
I also think that if the high rate of growth can tell us anything about what our future internal policy should be, it's that now that we have a lot of new lands and citizens we must develop this land and the new cities and make sure our citizens our happy (in other words, enter a building period).

[Reddawg]

Shiber I can agree with that. In fact I can go so far as to conclude that policy should be to follow up such intensive growth periods with periods of development.