Alliance Strength Analysis

[grahamkeatley]

Morning,

I was reading through the "War-Ready" thread and it just got me thinking about things, so I decided to expand on it and widen the criteria. I decided to focus on overall might as well as readiness, so not just percentages and averages. In my opinion, even if an alliance has half the ANS of another alliance - if it has double the NS it has an effect. It may not be a turning point but it needs to be taken into account.

The areas that I took into account;

NS Total, ANS, Infra Total, Tech Total, Nukes, Nukes Average, Infra Average, Tech Average, Infra:Tech, MP, SDI, WRC, Avg MilWon/member. Within these extra weight was added to Avg Military Wonders per member, Infra:Tech, Nukes per member.

I took the Top Alliances and Ranked in each category 1-80 (**If a category was double weight it was 2-160), and collated the scoring with the Top Alliance achieving the lowest score in total;

---

1 : Umbrella - 141
2 : The Order Of The Paradox - 194

---

3 : Mushroom Kingdom - 267
4 : Fark - 291
5 : World Task Force - 295
6 : Non Grata - 376
7 : FOK - 377

---

8 : Green Protection Agency - 421
9 : Global Order Of Darkness - 434
10 : Argent - 450
11 : Asgaard - 454
12 : Sparta - 485
13 : Boards Alliance Of Protectorate States - 488
14 : The Prolific Empire - 493

---

15 : Valhalla - 506
16 : Nueva Vida - 512
17 : The Grämlins - 531
18 : Créole - 543
19 : OMFG - 547
20 : The Last Remnants - 548
21 : The Dark Templar - 566
22 : Nordreich - 570
23 : Orange Defense Network - 590
24 : Olympus - 594
25 : Nusantara Elite Warriors - 612
26 : Siberian Tiger Alliance - 626
27 : Viridian Entente - 630
28 : Basketball Ninjas - 634
29 : Commonwealth Of Sovereign Nations - 647
30 : The Phoenix Federation - 649
31 : Independent Republic Of Orange Nations - 673
32 : The Order Of The Black Rose - 676
33 : The Foreign Division - 681
34 : Federation Of Armed Nations - 712
35 : Green Old Party - 723
36 : NATO - 731

---

37 : New Polar Order - 762
38 : Legacy - 810
39 : Echelon - 813
40 : Mostly Harmless Alliance - 815
41 : RnR - 831
42 : New Pacific Order - 850
43 : Colossus - 852
44 : We Are Perth Army - 854
45 : World Federation - 859
46 : Random Insanity Alliance - 861
47 : Europa - 866
48 : Amazon Nation - 881
49 : Global Alliance And Treaty Organization - 897
50 : The Legion - 903
51 : The Democratic Order - 907
52 : Multicolored Cross-X Alliance - 910
53 : The Grand Lodge Of Freemasons - 914
54 : Global Democratic Alliance - 943
55 : Drunk N Disorderly - 951
56 : The Brain - 952
57 : The Templar Knights - 966

---

58 : North Atlantic Defense Coalition - 1026
59 : Wolfpack - 1033
60 : Fellowship Of Elite Allied Republics - 1033
61 : Ragnarok - 1071
62 : The International - 1091
63 : AGW Overlords - 1117
64 : LOSS - 1132
65 : Imperial Assault Alliance - 1143
66 : Menotah - 1156
67 : The Realm Of The Rose - 1166
68 : Christian Coalition Of Countries - 1187
69 : Coalition Of Royal Allied Powers - 1234
70 : The Shadow Accord - 1250
71 : New Sith Order - 1252
72 : Pax Corvus - 1256
73 : United Purple Nations - 1275
74 : Guru Order - 1284
75 : Aurora Borealis - 1286
76 : Libertarian Socialist Federation - 1286
77 : The Imperial Order - 1343
78 : Knights Of Ni! - 1348
79 : Goon Order Of Oppression Negligence And Sadism - 1366
80 : Death Before Dishonor - 1401

I will try and incorporate additional categories and adjusted weightings if people have worthwhile suggestions on that front. Just note - no more collection of new data will be made, but I am more than willing to manipulate what I have as needed.

GK

[grahamkeatley]

For reference,

[img]http://i52.tinypic.com/r1na8p.jpg[/img]

Again, this is a first draft my intention is to alter the weightings as we go along with suggestions.

GK

[Alterego]

Outside of warchest there is nothing else you could have looked at. Great job GK

edit: I would have left out the neutrals because they dont go to war so you cant really call them war ready (technically you can but you know what I mean)

Edited August 26, 2011 by Alterego

[CzarBomba]

Very nice work. I like all the criteria you've used here. While some folks may still grumble about a few of these rankings (in particular neutrals on the list), they would be hard pressed to come up with more objective rankings than this. Well done, good sir.

[D34th]

We have a serious lack of tech, can Umbrella please send us some?

[janax]

I can live with 10th...for now.

[MrMuz]

Very nice analysis, but maybe do another one without the averages? I think some sanctioned alliances (especially MHA) are crippled here by all the ghosts they get. NG and TLR are doing well, but once random new nations start ghosting them, I think their rating might drop too. Warchest speculation aside, I believe MHA is quite capable of going one on one with some of the 'higher' rated alliances like GOD and BN.

The only way you could do this better is if you could try with things like top tier, upper mid tier, lower mid tier, warchests. I wonder if it's possible to estimate warchest from nation age, infra level, defending casualties, and trade ring.

[Sandwich Controversy]

[quote name='MrMuz' timestamp='1314384992' post='2788843']
Very nice analysis, but maybe do another one without the averages? I think some sanctioned alliances (especially MHA) are crippled here by all the ghosts they get. NG and TLR are doing well, but once random new nations start ghosting them, I think their rating might drop too. Warchest speculation aside, I believe MHA is quite capable of going one on one with some of the 'higher' rated alliances like GOD and BN.

The only way you could do this better is if you could try with things like top tier, upper mid tier, lower mid tier, warchests. I wonder if it's possible to estimate warchest from nation age, infra level, defending casualties, and trade ring.
[/quote]
Hahaha, I sure hope MHA, a 600 man alliance, could take on the Basketball Ninjas.

[commander thrawn]

Still dragging MJ up with us

[ChairmanHal]

12 : Sparta - 485 <--- Obviously it's their elite bomber forces that pull them up so far in the rankings

[chefjoe]

Great work, its appreciated

[JoshuaR]

Pretty cool, and does look more accurate.

[Shaazzam]

[quote name='Sandwich Controversy' timestamp='1314389677' post='2788872']
Hahaha, I sure hope MHA, a 600 man alliance, could take on the Basketball Ninjas.
[/quote]
Naah, we got'em.

[Xavii]

Seems about right.

[Jrenster]

I think we can all agree to this, actually. Pretty objective way to go about it.

[KagetheSecond]

19th? We can do better.

[MaGneT]

Wow, really cool. Must have taken an obscene amount of time, though. I think Creole is a shining example of how a very small (membership-wise) alliance can have a huge impact. Obviously that's been shown before, and such high aNS makes it self-evident, but we've never seen rankings with this sort of specificity. Nice.

Also, 21... not bad, but looking at the 20 ahead of DT... well, those are all some pretty good alliances. Obviously PF did great and its nice to see 4 Mjolnir members in the top 25


EDIT:
I know asking this takes a lot of nerve, but I'm sure a lot of us are thinking it. How often are you going to update this?

Edited August 26, 2011 by MaGneT

[Poobah]

Dammit BN, bringing PF down

Also, this is fantastic, excellent job gk

[The Pansy]

[quote name='MaGneT' timestamp='1314394162' post='2788916']
Wow, really cool. Must have taken an obscene amount of time, though. I think Creole is a shining example of how a very small (membership-wise) alliance can have a huge impact. Obviously that's been shown before, and such high aNS makes it self-evident, but we've never seen rankings with this sort of specificity. Nice.

Also, 21... not bad, but looking at the 20 ahead of DT... well, those are all some pretty good alliances. Obviously PF did great and its nice to see 4 Mjolnir members in the top 25


EDIT:
I know asking this takes a lot of nerve, but I'm sure a lot of us are thinking it. How often are you going to update this?
[/quote]
Olympus is coming for you DT!

[Schad]

[quote name='Poobah' timestamp='1314394293' post='2788918']
Dammit BN, bringing PF down

Also, this is fantastic, excellent job gk
[/quote]

Hey, someone has to bite the ankles of all the nations that the top tier knocks out of range. How else would we get WRC nations down to your level so that they can nuke you with impunity?

[LegendoftheSkies]

But what about Cruise Missile count?!

[White Chocolate]

[quote name='Shaazzam' timestamp='1314392744' post='2788900']
Naah, we got'em.
[/quote]

Preseason exhibition game

Edited August 26, 2011 by White Chocolate

[Banksy]

Well, the obvious issue with this is that you have given equal importance to a range of factors that aren't important (i.e. infra and others) at upper levels and you're effectively counting some twice (i.e. tech and infra WRT to ratios). It doesn't give an accurate idea of the true worth of some larger alliances - because it naturally favours small top-tier heavy alliances when all the recent wars have shown that they are actually of limited use after the initial rounds of war (TOP, Umbrella etc). So this has given quite a nice ranking system, but it doesn't really offer any genuine analysis.

Thanks for putting it together though, I always like these things.

[KainIIIC]

Agreed banksy. Given the role that averages play in these rankings, its going to look quite good if you are Umbrella or PF but not so much if you're GOONS, NSO, or LoSS. If you look at our nations 25k and above, you'd find their avgs would probably be worthy for top 10, however only 30% of our alliance is, and that ratio will drag our alliance towards the bottom.

However, collecting stats for different tiers sounds like an awful chore..

[Banksy]

[quote name='KainIIIC' timestamp='1314410876' post='2789054']
However, collecting stats for different tiers sounds like an awful chore..
[/quote]
Oh kill me now. That'd be awful.