Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkHeart
As we spoke about in IRC kila, my post was not propaganda (or an attempt at propaganda). Just simple maths, so why you mention propaganda here is questionable?. Can you (or somebody equally motivated) provide a count of the top 100 launchers as requested though please.
|
The only maths you've talked about is launchers and the basic assumption that "if there are less alliances alone I have more chances to win".
Lets debate the latter point first. ND's best chance of winning is the denial route whereby they are involved in a conflict where they end up as a late victor. With less alliances involved to precipitate that war, the chance of ND winning actually goes down. Omen might want less contenders on the face of it, but their current political play involves eliminating two of the alliances that can probably help them to number one. So again, the chance of Omen winning goes down the more alliances are eliminated. The only alliance where your assumption actually rings true is Conspiracy Theory (of which a quick search Munin reveals you to be a member).
The first assumption in terms of launchers is an interesting point. All it reveals is 'effort'. I've been thinking about this stat for some time for my own purposes, but that's another story. Launches != lands. And lands where you cap asteroids and destroy value are what count, because they are the fruits of all that 'effort'. But 'effort' does not mean 'success'.
The maths for round 30 are below. To sum up, you've got your math, I've got the math.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lokken
Because from their point of view its probably quite necessary. CT coming back to the pack is contingent on them being curtailed effectively in the very near future. People talk about XP but they know **** all on game mechanics because ultimately rank #1100 could land on #1 for massive XP gains, but the chances are very slim. While this is an extreme example it makes my point. The more the value lead extends, the greater CT's margin for error, the less margin of error for their opponents and the lower probability of profitable lands. As it gets better for the higher value alliance, it gets progressively worse for the lower value one. When value advantages take hold it's not a steady increase in terms of difficulty to overcome it - it's a runaway train.
|