Round 55 Alliance Statistics
This is roughly every 1/3 of the round (I forgot so it's a bit off, but you can get an idea).
Tick 452 - 38% through the round Code:
Tick 864 - 73% of the way through the round Code:
+------+------------------+---------+------------+------------+-----------+-----------+------------+---------------+----------+---------+---------------+---------------+ Code:
|
Re: Round 55 Alliance Statistics
wow, 1k more incs than faceless
|
Re: Round 55 Alliance Statistics
clear evidence that it's better to work smart than to work hard.
|
Re: Round 55 Alliance Statistics
would rather play hard, its a game
|
Re: Round 55 Alliance Statistics
high IQ plan - play hard and smart
|
Re: Round 55 Alliance Statistics
I find it interesting that Vikings had less incs than Faceless at the first 2 checkpoints and only 40 more by round end. Yet Vikings collapsed under 'overwhelming incs' and Faceless won the round, weird eh?
|
Re: Round 55 Alliance Statistics
The difference is that we had more concentrated incoming in a period for 3-4 days when we got bashed by 5 alliances, and with these stats we couldn't defend those incomings as a 40 man tag. So I just told the others to let the incomings land, it wasn't worth the hassle as it required you to JGP every member every tick then spam for incoming scans.
|
Re: Round 55 Alliance Statistics
Quote:
That's the beaulty of Statistics. They show what you want them to show. |
Re: Round 55 Alliance Statistics
my analysis of these stats (not that anyone cares):
1) faceless played the best politics - relatively low incs and low attacks launched but won the round 2) ct worked the hardest - most incs and most attacks 3) ult had the most effective defence 4) spore were 'jack of all and master of none' |
Re: Round 55 Alliance Statistics
Quote:
|
Re: Round 55 Alliance Statistics
Just look at Vikings and Face size variation along the round in CT tools and with the explanation already provided you will figure out what both were doing before and after Vikings got bashed.
|
Re: Round 55 Alliance Statistics
Quote:
|
Re: Round 55 Alliance Statistics
Its pretty obvious that Conspiracy was the alliance that got blocked against this round, and for them ending 3rd shows how good their teamwork mustve been.
Alliances like Spore and Ultores obviously had a lot of incs aswell, but im sure that the concentration of the incs was the deciding factor why they could not win. Ultores mustve had a good pre-round plan with block politics as CT/Spore/ND had more incommings during this period, but it seems like the Ultores block was too greedy midround, wich resulted in other alliances attacking them. Ultores had 100 incs on average daily the middle 17 days of the round, wich clearly mustve set them back with the strategy they used with value zik/ter + cath in forts. Spore had 110 incs daily the last 13 days of the round, and their strategy with zik/ter + cath in forts did not turn out good enough when ROCK/HR/Ultores/Vikings/FAnG blockwere crashing for roids and losses on the Spore side. I wonder if Vikings and Ultores gave up too easy this round, and if they had given it a go if they had decided to go for XP instead of value like some of the lesser alliances did? |
Re: Round 55 Alliance Statistics
Quote:
|
Re: Round 55 Alliance Statistics
Quote:
Ive started to like you more and more, since last round ingal, so dont misunderstand my opinions as something personal, and dont think being an rebel and kicking you out of that channel the other day is cus i have some deep frustration or hate for you, but try understand it from my opinion. |
Re: Round 55 Alliance Statistics
Quote:
And yes, we did "give up" too easily this round, and I don't think many of us care too much to be honest. As the rounds have progressed, I think many PA players aren't taking this game too seriously anymore. |
Re: Round 55 Alliance Statistics
Quote:
|
Re: Round 55 Alliance Statistics
Quote:
|
Re: Round 55 Alliance Statistics
Quote:
|
Re: Round 55 Alliance Statistics
Quote:
Not hard to imagine. Any serious ally should be able to defend itself on a 1x1 if grounding. |
Re: Round 55 Alliance Statistics
Quote:
|
Re: Round 55 Alliance Statistics
Did attacking activity drop off after numerous days of attacking for no gains? Or did everyone keep going 100% till the end?
|
Re: Round 55 Alliance Statistics
Quote:
|
Re: Round 55 Alliance Statistics
Clouds stop trying to pretend vikings did anything worthwhile this round
|
Re: Round 55 Alliance Statistics
Quote:
|
Re: Round 55 Alliance Statistics
Quote:
I would be happy to teach clouds how to better ruin an alliances chances at winning if he wishes ;) I cant hope to rival your consistency in being removed from alliances faster than you can join them, perhaps you can give me some tips on that. |
Re: Round 55 Alliance Statistics
Quote:
|
Re: Round 55 Alliance Statistics
Quote:
|
Re: Round 55 Alliance Statistics
Considering faceless and vikings both were at 44 members until pretty much the last day, both alliances had more incs per member than Spore. I'm just doing it in my head but it looks like:
Spore - 52.5 incs per member (60 members most of round) Faceless/Vikings - 55.5 incs per member (44 members most of round) So the 1k incs for Spore shouldn't really say much considering they had less incs per member. But no denying both CT and Ultores had the most incs per member |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 00:04. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2002 - 2018