Looking around at the guides for heroes and promo-versions of heroes, it seems the consensus is that standard Ra (with base power that damages) is generally better than the Ra: Horus promo (who trades damage for a card drawing base power). So I was a bit surprised by the statistics report, that shows Ra: Horus being about 4% more effective, and getting incapacitated 1% less often when compared to standard Ra.
Any ideas on why? Is it that Ra: Horus's card drawing leads to more combos, and that this is generally a more effective tactic?
I would disagree to a certain degree with Base Ra being better.
Horus Ra burns his deck so fast that two turns without that base power can lead to a much better set-up, and a much greater chance of finding his best cards.
I like Regular Ra better, he feels better when playing him, but I would not at all be surprised that Horus Ra wins more games.
It just depends what kind of game you're in. If you're in a fast paced game where damage needs to be dealt from everyone every turn, than base Ra is where it's at, but if you're doing a slow, long game with little ongoing destruction, then Horus Ra is a bit better.
About the statistics. Because the data pool is still very low and varied between the two Ras, you should really take those numbers with a grain of salt big enough to choke a donkey.
Beard Ra is going to mill through his deck much quicker than base Ra. This likely means a quicker Imbued Fire. Seeing IF faster on average could certainly have an effect on overall win %. Beard Ra players are also more likely to play into the "Staffarang" style of play contributing to less incaps.
It's also possible that some of those Horus wins were pre Ruling 15. Before that, my whole goal in playing Horus was to get out the super combo, and once you did.....games ended quickly unless an Aurora or something similar landed.
If we knew only that Horus Ra wins more, I would assume it's because he dies and uses his stupidly broken incap power to card-lock the villain forever. But apparently he also dies less often, so that theory's out.
Probably have to look further into the situational stats since Ra and Ra-Horus are different enough in style that things will make a difference.
I got handed a random game tonight that was Ra-Horus, Eternal Haka, and AZ vs Advanced Kismet in The Final Wasteland. I normally consider Kismet a relatively weak villain, though somewhat more tolerable on advanced since with some draws she can get kookily dangerous.
I got my head handed to me. Yes, Ra-Horus got cards out and started putting together a nice damage engine; just in time for Inconcevible Obstruction and Lady Luck to come out and spike it. Along with Eternal Haka getting pulverized due to jinx cards. Ra went down last since he was cycling Staff of Ra at one point to heal points. AZ did little since the initial draw was minor cards and two copies of his trash-picking card.
(I consider that group a fairly weak 3-hero team. Very little on-going removal. And with Haka and Ra in "draw card" version compared to "damage out the gate" I couldn't dish damage out early or consistent enough since all three were sort of long-run heroes.)
Kismet has a way of suddenly spiking into weird situations. Considering ive lost to base gloomweaver twice in the past 3 weeks (and beat him like 15 times but still) its possible (A combination of 3 zombies, the cultist htat brings out zombies, and pouch of bones meant some really /nasty/ turns for a bit)
As for the statistics on Ra vs Bearded ra if someone wants me to pull together some formulas let me know. Just be specific in what you want to see, it should be able to pull some of it out. But as Foote said ... take it with a grain of salt big enough to choke a donkey. Such things are fun, but hardly conclusive.