 Ivan (Admin) - 01.03.2012 at 07:44
|
|
|
| Congratulations to the winners! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yea :D! And congrats to the winners  |
|
|
|
| Curse you martians. Pups should have won 3rd. >:O Its funny how all three training clns would be winners if martians hadnt butted in. Its almost as if the main clns are having a break time. |
|
|
|
Written by Runway1R, 01.03.2012 at 08:05
Curse you martians. Pups should have won 3rd. >:O Its funny how all three training clns would be winners if martians hadnt butted in. Its almost as if the main clns are having a break time.
more like everyone refusing to play us, in fact last time we asked your coalition even after they had done all their matches so they didn't even get a loss they said no because we'd get points |
|
 YOBA - 01.03.2012 at 08:13
|
|
|
LOL, we (SRB) had more victories in total (and probably more points!) than BiteMe Too!. Are coalitions with 10 games played the only ones allowed there?
Great system BTW. And I appreciate the news post.  |
|
|
|
Written by Aristosseur, 01.03.2012 at 08:06
Written by Runway1R, 01.03.2012 at 08:05
Curse you martians. Pups should have won 3rd. >:O Its funny how all three training clns would be winners if martians hadnt butted in. Its almost as if the main clns are having a break time.
more like everyone refusing to play us, in fact last time we asked your coalition even after they had done all their matches so they didn't even get a loss they said no because we'd get points
SRB is too good, and Im not afraid to admit it. |
|
|
Ivan (Admin) - 01.03.2012 at 08:40
|
|
|
Written by YOBA, 01.03.2012 at 08:13
LOL, we (SRB) had more victories in total (and probably more points!) than BiteMe Too!. Are coalitions with 10 games played the only ones allowed there?
SRB: 4 wins, 125 points
BiteMe Too!: 5 wins, 302 points
10 games is not a requirement, but getting into the top 3 with less than 10 is not easy. |
|
|
|
Congrats to everyone!
Will the medals always be the same or they'll change according to the season? |
|
|
Ivan (Admin) - 01.03.2012 at 12:37
|
|
|
Written by Caulerpa, 01.03.2012 at 10:49
Will the medals always be the same or they'll change according to the season?
We'll see. I might be too lazy designing news ones every season. |
|
|
|
Congratz all 
Congratz on BM2 too!! Keep up the good work! |
|
|
|
Written by Ivan, 01.03.2012 at 12:37
We'll see. I might be too lazy designing news ones every season.
I didn't mean for every season, I thought of different medal for different season (like 1 for winter, 1 for spring etc.)
But nice work with these ones. |
|
|
Kate - 01.03.2012 at 13:18
|
|
|
| When will this new season end? |
|
|
Ivan (Admin) - 01.03.2012 at 15:15
|
|
|
Written by Kate, 01.03.2012 at 13:18
When will this new season end?
The end of May. |
|
|
|
| Congrats to all the other Revolutionaries and to Stalins Martians for coming out of nowhere to take 2nd place! |
|
|
|
| I can't wait till they announce the 2nd season's winners |
|
|
|
| Well i think that its not fair to SRB that get less points for their wins and other clns get like 70-80 points. if this system is too succed you might want to balance the point system |
|
 Pulse (Mod) - 01.03.2012 at 23:54
|
|
|
Written by Fredrick II, 01.03.2012 at 16:49
Well i think that its not fair to SRB that get less points for their wins and other clns get like 70-80 points. if this system is too succed you might want to balance the point system
True, the way it's set up it's more profitable to gimp one's competence on purpose after the 10 games. |
|
|
|
Whilst it's obvious that not playing the full 10 games is a disadvantage. I believe that basing the scores on gross SP earned rather than net SP earned is the cause of imbalances in the coalition system.
First there is no downside to playing games as opposed to not playing them. Say a coalition is on 5:0 there's no downside to them playing the rest of the games (even if they lose them) because their overall score will be unaffected and they may even win some of the games. There should be risk associated with a loss rather than it just being a missed opportunity to gain points.
Currently the only thing that happens when a clan loses a CW is a loss of compotence which only makes the next CW you win gain you more SP (relative to if you had won the previous game). Net scoring would associate a certain risk with losing however would not upset the system so much that a team could win a few games and just sit on their points for the rest of the season.
I've redone the coalition scores to show net instead of gross SP (there's not that many major changes to the finishing positions).
The Revolutionaries: 315
Stalins Martians: 222
Dalmati: 195
BiteMe! Too: 147
Empire SRB: 125
GORY FLORALZOOKA: 111
Dalmati Pups: 107
Dutch Pride: 49
(After this point all SP scores are in minus figures)
Dutch Pride, Dalmati and Empire SRB are examples of Clans that did not play all their games but did not lose any. As you can see they have not risen to the top of the lists so it does not penalise too harshly those teams that lose some but play all 10 games with Revolutionaries and Stalins Martians respectable win:loss ratio still earning them the top spots. The clans that are punished harsly in this system are those that have lost more than they have won (moreover, lost more than they have won against opponents that have less compotence rating than themselves) and have dissapeared from the positive rankings entirely. BiteMe! Too are an example of a 5 wins 5 losses clan but those wins and losses have been against superior teams and therefore their overall SP remains positive and a very respectable 4th position.
Sorry for the wall of text and possibly bad maths. |
|
|
|
An alternative to the above system is to base the scoring system on what is currently used in World of Warcraft Arenas: Instead of basing the scoring on the points earned from Clan Wars base it on the clan compotence (which would get reset at the start of each season) which would show a more positive correlation between wins, losses and abilities.
Just some ideas. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| I think the gold one should have been first, blue second, red last |
|
|
|
| Barrymore's idea (akin to WoW arena rating) is a good one: a reset of competence every season and ranking based off competence would be far better than the system today. |
|
|
|
| One hitch in making it based solely off competence is that a coalition could simply fight a bunch of random coalitions to gain an artificially high competence. |
|
Arabic
Bulgarian
Chinese Simplified
Chinese Traditional
Croatian
Dutch
Estonian
French
German
Hebrew
Italian
Leetspeak
Macedonian
Polish
Portuguese
Serbian
Spanish
Turkish
The Revolutionaries
Stalins Martians
BiteMe Too!
