Jump to content

The 18th War of Argent Relevancy stats (not done particularly well)


Sarkin

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, Bionic redhead said:

But he's not in The Dark Templar or The Killer Turtle Brigade, so how is he meant to leave a dumpster fire of an alliance?

 

I wonder if New Boobage Order is recruiting during these troubling times?

 

49 minutes ago, HeroofTime55 said:

It is very hard to rank high when my opponents keep rolling over and dying.  Second lowest opponent score on the whole damn chart, dang.  VE put up a decent fight but everyone else just rolled over and died right away, lol.  

 

I think things may balance out over time, but unfortunately since VE hasn't been in the war that long relative to others (doom, RFD), their member's scores are not very high in general (# wars declared is 1/3 of it after all). At the same time I like the system because aside from # wars it rewards fighting people who fight back.

 

Next update will include some of these alliance member averages (which of course will be conclusive evidence that alliance X or Y is the most dumpster fire).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 277
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

16 minutes ago, Piejonk said:

 

I wonder if New Boobage Order is recruiting during these troubling times?

 

 

I think things may balance out over time, but unfortunately since VE hasn't been in the war that long relative to others (doom, RFD), their member's scores are not very high in general (# wars declared is 1/3 of it after all). At the same time I like the system because aside from # wars it rewards fighting people who fight back.

 

Next update will include some of these alliance member averages (which of course will be conclusive evidence that alliance X or Y is the most dumpster fire).


Would it make sense to divide the number of wars by the number of days their alliance has been at war, and use that instead of just raw war count?  Seems that it would properly adjust the figure in question.

Edited by HeroofTime55
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Bionic redhead said:

But he's not in The Dark Templar or The Killer Turtle Brigade, so how is he meant to leave a dumpster fire of an alliance?

Eh. Calling DT a dumpster fire really isn't fair. Kinda a disservice to dumpster fires. We're more like a sack of moldy potatoes with a few razor blades mixed in. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, HeroofTime55 said:


Would it make sense to divide the number of wars by the number of days their alliance has been at war, and use that instead of just raw war count?  Seems that it would properly adjust the figure in question.

 

I could give this a shot just to see what it looks like. I think my reason against this initially was mostly that it complicates an overly complicated system anyways, and capturing the performance in this game in terms of mechanics is already a pretty unreasonable task. I suppose its a more "for fun" kinda list, that maybe does show whos doing the best in their wars, but theres so many other factors that cloud the stats no matter what.

 

I was also thinking that in between people sitting in peace mode for varying amounts of time, and the war dragging out for longer, things will balance out more or less. Theres not going to be many people that are able to declare 4 wars basically every week, and even with that being able to keep up damage numbers.

 

I tried to dilute all the information into one stat that just depends on: declare more wars, do more damage, fight people who fight back, and it goes up.

Edited by Piejonk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HeroofTime55 said:


Would it make sense to divide the number of wars by the number of days their alliance has been at war, and use that instead of just raw war count?  Seems that it would properly adjust the figure in question.

 

Here is the result. Changed the shown values to be more intuitive (damage done, damage taken, # of wars), but the formula is now based on damage done per tech, damage ratio, # wars per week, and opponent score.

 

Y7OrB3v.png

 

 

Edited by Piejonk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is clearly wrong as it moves me down and I have been at or near the top of warcharts for like the past 7 years (in SE, TE and that other world while I was there). 10th seems much more correct than 20th. :)

But I'm sure in the long run I will continue to move up either way so don't really care that much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Canik said:

This is clearly wrong as it moves me down and I have been at or near the top of warcharts for like the past 7 years (in SE, TE and that other world while I was there). 10th seems much more correct than 20th. :)

But I'm sure in the long run I will continue to move up either way so don't really care that much.

 

Canik, I added in some stats from the very beginning of the war that I was kindly provided. The whole stats db should now be complete but this is probably a part of the reason for this movement. 

 

29 minutes ago, HeroofTime55 said:

Idunno, I seem to have moved up slightly.  But, unfortunately, my opponent score is still terrible, lol.  I thought it might have given me a better uptick between VE and Trashmir.  Not so, though.  Sad.

The biggest change from this was probably for VE members, a whole lot of them had huge jumps. I like this change, especially if it's kept hidden, and it makes complete sense and was easy to implement. Will be keeping it moving forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe I'm misreading it, but while the change seems to account for people who have only recently joined the war, it seems like it also penalizes people who have been "in the war" for a long time but haven't been fighting the entire time, right? If so, then I personally think it is a really good change to an already excellent formula.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, lilweirdward said:

Maybe I'm misreading it, but while the change seems to account for people who have only recently joined the war, it seems like it also penalizes people who have been "in the war" for a long time but haven't been fighting the entire time, right? If so, then I personally think it is a really good change to an already excellent formula.

 

It does penalize them, but there's a natural decay to war score if you're just sitting in peace mode anyways. But now even more so, active people get more rewarded now, even if you joined the war late (Fark/VE).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It has come to my attention that some alliances may be considered dumpster fires relative to others. Naturally the best way to settle this is by completely relevant and informative stats. I call it the dumpster fire list and will post it every so often:

 

f76sryB.png

 

So who really is the biggest dumpster fire? Be the judge yourself!

 

Disclaimer: Please keep in mind some of the variance involved in averages, so no, all you micros are not the least dumpster fire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Piejonk said:

So who really is the biggest dumpster fire? Be the judge yourself!

 

Always love a new chart. I was wondering, is the formula calculating DT's Damage ratio (member avg) correct? The 6.1 there seems like such an outlier for a non-micro that I'm wondering if something got thrown off. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Sarkin said:

 

Always love a new chart. I was wondering, is the formula calculating DT's Damage ratio (member avg) correct? The 6.1 there seems like such an outlier for a non-micro that I'm wondering if something got thrown off. 

 

 

It is correct. Some of your members have extreme damage ratios which throws this off. Check mmansfield68 as an example. DT does not have that many members which means this has a large effect on the average. I could filter this out, but I don't think its necessary.

 

This is why the "opponent" score was introduced in the first place, to balance out extreme damage ratios against people who don't fight back. While the top 100 leaderboard is an individual list it seemed to be misunderstood by many people as "X alliance has so many members on the list, they must be doing really well in the war!", which is absolutely not the case. For alliances, the story is better told by the alliance stats I have been posting, and perhaps this most recent stat post with member averages of various stats. But then again they are averages, and these stats look very different depending on if you're on the offensive/defensive side of the war among many other things.

Edited by Piejonk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Piejonk said:

So who really is the biggest dumpster fire? Be the judge yourself!

 

Very interesting. Some tough competition on both sides, but I think ODN is indisputably the winner here, with (I believe) record lows in all 3 averaged categories. Congrats ODN on being the biggest dumpster fire!

 

As a side note, I'd be curious what it would look like to average the war scores for all members of each alliance, as well as to do a sort of war score for each alliance collectively that would be similar to the per member one, especially if there was a way to multiply it by the average score of the alliances each alliance is at war with. I don't think it would tell us a whole lot that these stats don't already show, but more data points are always fun lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, lilweirdward said:

 

Very interesting. Some tough competition on both sides, but I think ODN is indisputably the winner here, with (I believe) record lows in all 3 averaged categories. Congrats ODN on being the biggest dumpster fire!

 

As a side note, I'd be curious what it would look like to average the war scores for all members of each alliance, as well as to do a sort of war score for each alliance collectively that would be similar to the per member one, especially if there was a way to multiply it by the average score of the alliances each alliance is at war with. I don't think it would tell us a whole lot that these stats don't already show, but more data points are always fun lol.

 

I avoided using the scores in this case to make the dumpster diving process as clear as possible for everyone. Of course there is some variance, but for alliances with more members (and wars), the averages are much more realistic than for smaller alliances.

 

Will be including a war score average in the more detailed alliance stats I post. It is actually pretty interesting and surprisingly balanced in some cases. Others not.

 

I think both sides can agree that ODN is the smelliest dumpster of them all, but with their complete inactivity its not really a surprise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, firingline said:

 

That's easy. Just delete 4 wars from Canik's stats before uploading. 

 

You know... for reasons.

Thank you for being apart of me moving up in the rankings, I told you I'd be here for you soon. ❤️ I'll Crack top 5 again. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few comments:

 

- Introduction of the last bit of missing stats (thanks @lilweirdward)  has shifted some things around. The main effect this had was complete some wars that were shown as still Active in my database. I promise the data is as complete as can be now and will be going forward.

- Reduced the dependency of opponent score on war score. Still matters significantly, just not as much as before. An average opponent score of >1 is rewarding, while that of <1 is even less so now.

- Please keep in mind the time scaling now in place, which means that even though some nations in alliances such as FTW have a lot of wars, this is "equivalent" to a nation from one of the late alliance joiners who has maybe half the wars.

- The changes were taken from the dumpster update last week, not from the individual/alliance update before that.

 

Individual stats:

 

APsEfG8.png

 

Direct link: https://i.imgur.com/APsEfG8.png

 

Alliance stats:

 

7ygjLnj.png

 

Direct link: https://i.imgur.com/7ygjLnj.png

 

Dumpster stats:

 

WNumGF5.png

 

Direct link: https://i.imgur.com/WNumGF5.png

 

As always, if you are having a hard time opening the images, feel free to reach out to me and I can provide full quality ones and/or the source tables.

Edited by Piejonk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...