I have the dravidian and gurjara achievement without owning the DLC and i havent played the campaigns. Not sure why. I think one of them even popped up after a loosing game, where the enemy had that civ. So something seems bugged.
To make it even more funny: My best civ according to my ingame profile is Gurjaras. Again: I havent played that civ, since i dont even own the DLC.
Dont ask me how this is possible. I dont know either.
All that then only leaves the campaigns as a reliable measurement, but it only accounts for players active enough to finish them. And active players are more likely to buy the DLC in the first place. We do not know how much overlap there is between finishing campaigns but the highest finished is a base minimum, the close values between campaigns of the same DLC may indicate that most players who played them finished them all, a small % not finishing the harder ones.
Finished a vanilla campaign, not counting William Wallace : at least 5.7% (Joan of Arc)
Finishted a LOTW campaign : at least 3.3% (Longshanks)
Finished a DATW campaign : at least 1.7% (Algirdas & Kestutis)
Finished a DOI campaign : at least 0.6% (tie between Devapala and Babur)
Maybe not surprisingly we see a bias toward 1-swords campaigns as the most finished.
If we wanted to judge popularity, we’d need to see the curves for each DLC of how much each sold this time, then comparing the curves. But we cannot even have an accurate raw instant number…
So were comparing a dlc that has been out for a month and a half to two that have been out for roughly a year, have had multiple sales, one of which was included free with age 4.
And despite this has better review scores and your conclusion is that the other dlcs clearly mean europe sells better?
I mean that we should be comparing the play rates of the DotD, Lotw and DoI civs at the month of release (or in the case of Burgundians you can look at the post buff patch)
The playrates are a decent way to look at how popular these civs are
