Superhero08 Posted July 17, 2014 Report Share Posted July 17, 2014 (edited) this ranking is looking at AVERAGE and CURRENT* level of development where development is based mostly on tech amount. ranking low on this index does not mean your AA lacks an upper tier. it would mean your alliance is not only or mostly upper tier. it also would not mean your AA does not develop its nations. it would mean your AA has not yet developed its nations -- on average -- to the level of the AAs ahead of yours. this essentially does not reflect the rate at which an AA is currently developing (see below). *CURRENT meaning it is static. some AAs ranking low here may be developing their younger, newer, or war-ravaged nations very efficiently -- in some cases, no doubt, more efficiently than some AAs ranking much higher. this index simply shows that they have not yet imported as much tech on average. to rank the development of AAs (again, defined here as tech acquired) over a period of time, one could take this same formula in a week or month or year and see the extent to which AAs' development has either progressed or regressed (ofc tracking actual development of an AA's nations requires taking an AA's nation gains and losses into consideration over the time period). the formula is a bit arbitrary, but it is interesting nonetheless. it must be somewhat accurate because it places DBDC at the top. anyway, there's no reason to feel offended by nor get one's panties in a wad about this index. people should post more indexes. if you feel your AA is slighted, see how you can display information differently. Edited July 18, 2014 by Superhero08 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Groucho Marx Posted July 17, 2014 Report Share Posted July 17, 2014 An undergrad's mistake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saxplayer Posted July 17, 2014 Author Report Share Posted July 17, 2014 (edited) Alliance Score 100k < 99k-70k IRON 282 80 (22.72%) 28 (7.95%) Umbrella 148.5 47 (68.11%) 5 (7.24% DT 142.5 42 (52.5%) 11 (13.75%) TOP 132 34 (38.2%) 20 (22.47%) NPO 111 23 (7.41%) 28 (9.03%) NpO 105 24 (8.82%) 22 (8.08%) ODN 100.5 21 (15.12%) 25 (18.11%) Valhalla 100.5 23 (23%) 21 (21%) GLoF 90 25 (31.25%) 10 (12.5%) MHA 88.5 20 (15.74%) 19 (14.96%) NEW 88.5 28 (33.33%) 3 (3.57%) R&R 81 11 (5.64%) 32 (16.41%) Fark 78 11 (9.46%) 30 (25.86%) FAN 75 16 (18.18%) 18 (20.45%) Sparta 73.5 14 (8.80%) 21 (13.07%) NATO 72 17 (11.46%) 14 (9.58% KoN 70.5 23 (39.65%) 1 (1.72% MI6 69 15 (15.30%) 16 (16.32%) VE 67.5 12 (8.51%) 21 (14.78%) TPF 58.5 14 (20.58%) 11 (16.17%) RIA 57 12 (19.67%) 14 (22.95%) Non Grata 57 11 (10.47%) 16 (15.23%) NADC 55.5 13 (13.82%) 11 (11.70%) DBDC 54 18 (94.73%) 0 STA 51 12 (21.42%) 10 (17.85%) FEAR 49.5 13 (35.13%) 7 (18.91%) UPN 49.5 11 (16.92%) 11 (16.92%) GOONS 48 6 (4.87% 20 (16.26%) MCXA 46.5 10 (10.63%) 11 (11.07%) GATO 46.5 8 (8.79%) 15 (16.48%) DoD 45 11 (32.35%) 8 (23.52%) GDA 45 11 (28.94%) 8 (21.05%) TSK 45 11 (18.03%) 8 (13.11%) LoSS 43.5 9 (8.01%) 11 (10%) AB 43.5 12 (27.27%) 5 (11.36%) TTK 42 6 (6.59%) 16 (17.58%) WAPA 42 13 (46.4%) 2 (7.14%) The Legion 40.5 7 (5.07%) 13 (9.42%) TIO 40.5 8 (14.03%) 11 (19.29%) CCC 39 7 (7.36%) 12 (12.63%) Sengoku 39 10 (26.31%) 6 (15.78%) CRAP 37.5 9 (17.64%) 7 (13.72%) Wolfpack 36 10 (32.2%) 4 (12.9% Ai 34.5 5 (7.57%) 13 (19.69%) TSC 33 8 (22.22% 6 (16.66%) TLR 31.5 3 (4.47%) 15 (22.38%) TTE 31.5 7 (11.66%) 7 (11.66%) OG 31.5 9 (60%) 3 (20%) KotRT 30 8 (15.09%) 2 (3.77%) SUN 30 7 (8.86%) 6 (7.59%) SPTR 30 8 (33.33%) 4 (16.66%) The Gramlins 30 10 (62.5%) 0 Invicta 27 4 (4.81%) 10 (12.04%) The Int 27 4 (6.15%) 10 (15.38%) GOP 27 8 (23.52%) 2 (5.88%) tJL 25.5 8 (24.24%) 1 (3.03%) Avalanche 25.5 5 (20.83%) 7 (29.16%) AO 24 7 (38.88%) 2 (11.76% Menotah 22.5 5 (25%) 5 (25%) NSO 22.5 3 (3.29%) 9 (9.89%) PPO 21 4 (19.04%) 6 (28.57% MW 21 3 (5.55%) 8 (14.81%) TSM 18 0 12 (52.17%) Argent 16.5 4 (19.01%) 3 (14.28%) DS 15 5 (17.24%) 0 NSF 15 4 (10.52%) 2 (5.26%) AGW 15 3 (17.64%) 4 (23.52%) GOD 13.5 1 (2.22%) 7 (15.55%) Kaskus 13.5 2 (7.14%) 5 (17.85%) NoR 12 2 (2.27%) 4 (4.54%) SRA 9 2 (7.14%) 2 (7.14%) Atlas 9 2 (3.33%) 2 (3.33%) III% 7.5 2 (10%) 1 (5%) USN 1.5 0 1 (2.12%) Kashmir 1.5 0 1 (2.4%) This was made to more fairly represent the number of developed nations in an alliance, for a better looking chart, go here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1KfdoIG6W7-4HEk2O_bOScDxefu6BOtCjtyRLBis8K3E/edit To make these stats, each 100k+ NS nation was worth 3 points, and each 99k-70k NS nation was worth 1.5 points. The percentages show what percentage of that alliance's membership fell into that catagory. Edited July 17, 2014 by Saxplayer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canik Posted July 17, 2014 Report Share Posted July 17, 2014 NADC 55.5 13 (13.82%) 11 (11.70%) DBDC 54 18 (94.73%) 0 STA 51 12 (21.42%) 10 (17.85%) FEAR 49.5 13 (35.13%) 7 (18.91%) UPN 49.5 11 (16.92%) 11 (16.92%) GOONS 48 6 (4.87% 20 (16.26%) Maybe you should give extra points for having 200k+ nations or something. DBDC should never, ever be listed lower than NADC. xD I do like how FEAR is above UPN & GOONS though, and just two below DBDC. :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saxplayer Posted July 17, 2014 Author Report Share Posted July 17, 2014 Maybe you should give extra points for having 200k+ nations or something. DBDC should never, ever be listed lower than NADC. xD I do like how FEAR is above UPN & GOONS though, and just two below DBDC. :D Yeah, I considered that, I just don't know how to factor that in exactly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted July 17, 2014 Report Share Posted July 17, 2014 Yeah, I considered that, I just don't know how to factor that in exactly. double it per NS tier 6 for 200k NS, 12 for 400k, 24 for 800k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saladjoe Posted July 21, 2014 Report Share Posted July 21, 2014 (edited) Again, you're factoring in land and militarization when you just go by raw NS, as well as infra heavy nations. At least use a real NS measurement (tech and infra only) plus adding up the amount of each respective military wonder and dividing that by the total # of nations. A nation with 100K NS but a <0.5 t/i ratio that's boosted by land/full militarization and doesn't have a WRC isn't worth half of what a nation with a t/i ratio approaching 1.0 with full military wonders. Not to mention the impact that warchests would have on this, but that's obviously not something you can just pull from a nation listing. So something like ((total infra + total tech)/total nations) + ((total WRCs +total MPs + total SDIs + total Pentagons +total SLSs + total AADNs + total FAFBs +total HNMSs + total CIAs)/total nations) but that would take more work than just counting nations in certain NS rankings ;) You could even weight either the real NS or wonder "strength" categories if either one starts to be too large. Also the CIA thing would take looking at spy odds and some of those wonders might not even be worth factoring in like the air related ones or horrible mil wonders like FSS and IMS. Edit: flipped < Edited July 21, 2014 by Saladjoe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auctor Posted July 21, 2014 Report Share Posted July 21, 2014 Nations with over 1k natural land growth should also slightly weaken your ranking imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saxplayer Posted July 21, 2014 Author Report Share Posted July 21, 2014 Nations with over 1k natural land growth should also slightly weaken your ranking imo. Yeah, although 1k Land is only 1,500 NS, which, when you have a 100k NS nation, is little over 1%. Again, you're factoring in land and militarization when you just go by raw NS, as well as infra heavy nations. At least use a real NS measurement (tech and infra only) plus adding up the amount of each respective military wonder and dividing that by the total # of nations. A nation with 100K NS but a <0.5 t/i ratio that's boosted by land/full militarization and doesn't have a WRC isn't worth half of what a nation with a t/i ratio approaching 1.0 with full military wonders. Not to mention the impact that warchests would have on this, but that's obviously not something you can just pull from a nation listing. So something like ((total infra + total tech)/total nations) + ((total WRCs +total MPs + total SDIs + total Pentagons +total SLSs + total AADNs + total FAFBs +total HNMSs + total CIAs)/total nations) but that would take more work than just counting nations in certain NS rankings ;) You could even weight either the real NS or wonder "strength" categories if either one starts to be too large. Also the CIA thing would take looking at spy odds and some of those wonders might not even be worth factoring in like the air related ones or horrible mil wonders like FSS and IMS. Edit: flipped < It's a good idea, I just don't have the time to count all that by hand, nor the coding abilities to write a program to do it for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auctor Posted July 21, 2014 Report Share Posted July 21, 2014 Natural growth land doesn't add NS. I merely meant nations with more than 1k natural growth land can't escape navies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.