 |
|
25 Sep 2015, 21:35
|
#1
|
|
Propaganda Chief
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
|
Inc stats discussion pos R63
BowS:
Total incommings: 2695
Total defence fleets sent: 2660
p3nguins(56/59): Hostile 1143 - Friendly 46
NewDawn(44/44): Hostile 747 - Friendly 16
Faceless(60/60): Hostile 170 - Friendly 30
Conspiracy(60/60): Hostile 155 - Friendly 89
No intel(166): Hostile 108 - Friendly 63
Black-Flag(55/60): Hostile 103 - friendly 62
__________________
RainbowS
RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
Last edited by BloodyButcher; 25 Sep 2015 at 21:41.
|
|
|
|
25 Sep 2015, 23:17
|
#2
|
|
Dictator
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 634
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Wouldn't be surprised to see p3ng top hostiles for a few alliances again. Probably add BF and FL to the list.
|
|
|
|
|
29 Sep 2015, 09:04
|
#3
|
|
Propaganda Chief
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
BF Average 49 inc each member - 62% inc recall - Attack average 44 - Defence Average 30
P3ng Average 49 inc each member - 52% inc recall - Attack average 42 - Defence Average 36
FL Average 70 inc each member - 53% inc recall - Attack average 38 - Defence Average 45
CT Average 58 inc each member - 43% inc recall - Attack average 48 - Defence Average 40
BowS Average 58 inc each member - 58% inc recall - Attack average 43 - Defence Average 53
Ult Average 56 inc each member - 43% inc recall - Attack average 42 - Defence Average 28
HR Average 34 inc each member - 46% inc recall - Attack average 34 - Defence Average 34
ND Average 39 inc each member - 43% inc recall - Attack average 37 - Defence Average 32
Norse Average 27 inc each member - 42% inc recall - Attack average 43 - Defence Average 24
__________________
RainbowS
RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
|
|
|
|
|
29 Sep 2015, 16:01
|
#4
|
|
Knightly Protector
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Avalon
Posts: 590
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Link to the incoming stats for the ones that dont know, Quite interesting.
http://beta.planetarion.com/history/...?id=6&round=63
__________________
TGV Ex-HC 
-No I am not suffering from insanity. I am enjoying every minute of it. 
Est Sularus oth Mithas
My Honour is My Life, My Life is My Honour
|
|
|
|
|
29 Sep 2015, 16:32
|
#5
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 517
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Quote:
Originally Posted by RexDrax
|
FL Block (FL+ULT): 6921 incs
BF Block (BF+CT+P3NG): 9291 incs
Conclusion, FL not only did fence the entire round but manage to lost it.
__________________
mxy
|
|
|
|
|
29 Sep 2015, 16:36
|
#6
|
|
Propaganda Chief
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Quote:
Originally Posted by fortran
FL Block (FL+ULT): 6921 incs
BF Block (BF+CT+P3NG): 9291 incs
Conclusion, FL not only did fence the entire round but manage to lost it.
|
Too be fair to FL, it never existed a "FL block" more or less.
And if they had fenced the whole round, they wouldnt have 1300 more incs than the rest of the top3
__________________
RainbowS
RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
|
|
|
|
|
29 Sep 2015, 17:09
|
#7
|
|
Internal Error
Join Date: May 2002
Location: the Netherlands
Posts: 696
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Quote:
Originally Posted by fortran
FL Block (FL+ULT): 6921 incs
BF Block (BF+CT+P3NG): 9291 incs
Conclusion, FL not only did fence the entire round but manage to lost it.
|
Ultores was busy with CT the majority of the round. You cant call FL/Ult a block.
__________________
Nitros
[]LCH[] ..lets change history
|
|
|
|
|
29 Sep 2015, 18:18
|
#8
|
|
Sain†s
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 331
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
It wasn't simply politics. FL and p3ng both wanted to hit us towards the end of the round, and no political situation prevented it. Value lead and defensive organisation did - nobody wanted to hit us alone, so nobody made the first move.
__________________
☠ | ROCK | BowS | Sain†s
|
|
|
|
|
29 Sep 2015, 18:34
|
#9
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 77
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Why the reason for trolling mxy?
BF won cause the political situation this round was pretty chilled..
Having a troll ultores tag makes for a boring round.
p3ng always plays for individual planetranks, never alliewin.
Faceless usually does the same, gal and planets but with full tag this round and a competent playerbase they had to compete for #1
All in all, good dcing and politics made BF win again!
Also FL much like Ultores when they play serious are not the people`s pick. Generally disliken to say the least 
__________________
Skydivenaked
Recent rounds:
Round 68 - #1 Gal Rank #6 planet
Round 67 - #1 Gal
Round 65 - Rank #3 Norsemen
Round 61 - Rank #37 Faceless
Round 60 - Rank #14 Ultores
Round 58 - Rank #35 Allieless xp play
Round 56 - Rank #14 Vikings
Round 54 - Rank #5 Vikings
|
|
|
|
|
29 Sep 2015, 18:54
|
#10
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 517
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDN
Why the reason for trolling mxy?
|
No reason. Maybe a little due to the talk about BF being the god of defense. But yeah round was decided in the political sphere. And IMHO, 4205 incs showed the other block slacked a little in attack aswell. I think the sum stagnation and stats were the main cause of that.
__________________
mxy
|
|
|
|
|
29 Sep 2015, 18:56
|
#11
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 245
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
The following is based on data about fleet launches provided by the PA team.
The first part is using the same method as the PA team used to create the alliance stats;
The numbers however are not an exact match but at the moment there is no real incentive to drill down to it to find the differences..
The second part is using a slightly different method to calculate the numbers;
To calculate the number of incs for an alliance the stats in PA count the incs of the player that are in that alliance at end of round..
This can (and is) different then the actual incs that these planets received while in tag in the alliance.
In the second part the alliance that the planets were in at launch tick is used
It also only counts the incomings that landed before or on PT 1153 (the PA stats appear to also included fleet launches before PT 1153 and landing after PT 1153).
In both cases: - the rows represent the number of incs an alliance received
- the columns represent the number of hostile fleets an alliance launched
i.e.: - BF received 693 hostile fleets from p3n;
- BF send 485 hostile fleets to p3n;
First part
Code:
| BF | p3n | Face | CT | RB | Ult | HR | ND | Norse | HODOR | Terra | ASC | COBRA | GBP | Other | Total |
|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
| BF | 4 | 693 | 624 | 47 | 84 | 342 | 124 | 149 | 303 | 250 | 64 | 45 | 36 | | 150 | 2915 |
| p3n | 485 | 36 | 358 | 68 | 894 | 29 | 276 | 171 | 164 | 46 | 77 | 47 | 110 | 14 | 113 | 2888 |
| Face | 1141 | 270 | 8 | 816 | 159 | 37 | 228 | 595 | 198 | 271 | 50 | 110 | 92 | | 208 | 4183 |
| CT | 98 | 64 | 524 | 1 | 91 | 1788 | 205 | 8 | 237 | 96 | 136 | 38 | 48 | 1 | 135 | 3470 |
| RB | 137 | 1160 | 165 | 136 | 6 | 8 | 84 | 738 | 39 | 105 | 20 | 46 | 12 | 6 | 101 | 2763 |
| Ult | 475 | 48 | 82 | 1825 | 14 | 2 | 27 | 43 | 34 | 34 | 39 | 23 | 29 | 1 | 50 | 2726 |
| HR | 280 | 284 | 195 | 221 | 60 | 25 | 25 | 33 | 1 | 18 | 141 | 27 | 34 | 11 | 34 | 1389 |
| ND | 160 | 110 | 436 | 9 | 522 | 34 | 31 | 4 | 5 | 39 | 115 | 41 | 48 | 6 | 85 | 1645 |
| Norse | 55 | 53 | 51 | 215 | 29 | 13 | 7 | 9 | | 159 | 33 | 17 | 2 | 2 | 23 | 668 |
| HODOR | 113 | 68 | 91 | 42 | 71 | 12 | 26 | 41 | 114 | | 18 | 3 | 35 | 11 | 26 | 671 |
| Terra | 96 | 51 | 177 | 100 | 49 | 5 | 121 | 99 | 33 | 16 | | 16 | 18 | 1 | 26 | 808 |
| ASC | 29 | 80 | 157 | 53 | 70 | 11 | 24 | 18 | 12 | 4 | 23 | | 30 | 4 | 24 | 539 |
| COBRA | 74 | 56 | 25 | 20 | 13 | 13 | 18 | 10 | 5 | 32 | 55 | 9 | 2 | | 12 | 344 |
| GBP | 3 | 14 | 6 | 5 | 29 | 3 | 11 | 10 | | 5 | 1 | 2 | | | 11 | 100 |
| Other | 166 | 217 | 240 | 239 | 258 | 213 | 318 | 208 | 72 | 39 | 123 | 51 | 47 | 30 | 282 | 2503 |
|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
| Total | 3316 | 3204 | 3139 | 3797 | 2349 | 2535 | 1525 | 2136 | 1217 | 1114 | 895 | 475 | 543 | 87 | 1280 | 27612 |
|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
Second part
Full round:
Code:
| BF | p3n | Face | CT | RB | Ult | HR | ND | Norse | HODOR | Terra | ASC | COBRA | GBP | Other | Total |
|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
| BF | | 690 | 593 | 31 | 47 | 326 | 111 | 121 | 290 | 236 | 63 | 82 | 26 | | 121 | 2737 |
| p3n | 461 | | 336 | | 857 | 30 | 247 | 158 | 147 | 59 | 74 | 77 | 106 | 19 | 67 | 2638 |
| Face | 1118 | 258 | | 761 | 147 | 38 | 236 | 614 | 199 | 268 | 50 | 197 | 91 | 8 | 167 | 4152 |
| CT | 80 | | 488 | | 95 | 1964 | 221 | 8 | 236 | 98 | 130 | 41 | 49 | 33 | 100 | 3543 |
| RB | 104 | 1154 | 163 | 128 | | 2 | 80 | 728 | 19 | 82 | 18 | 65 | 6 | 37 | 90 | 2676 |
| Ult | 511 | 48 | 92 | 2009 | 2 | | 39 | 46 | 32 | 42 | 40 | 33 | 31 | 10 | 63 | 2998 |
| HR | 268 | 281 | 211 | 231 | 56 | 26 | | 26 | 1 | 22 | 146 | 21 | 28 | 14 | 55 | 1386 |
| ND | 150 | 110 | 450 | 5 | 511 | 34 | 34 | | 5 | 51 | 128 | 46 | 47 | 8 | 101 | 1680 |
| Norse | 46 | 44 | 52 | 212 | 17 | 12 | 7 | 10 | | 161 | 33 | 16 | 2 | 3 | 40 | 655 |
| HODOR | 105 | 62 | 92 | 41 | 64 | 16 | 27 | 48 | 115 | | 23 | | 41 | 17 | 40 | 691 |
| Terra | 96 | 48 | 172 | 100 | 47 | 5 | 119 | 99 | 32 | 18 | | 16 | 18 | 2 | 30 | 802 |
| ASC | 42 | 102 | 188 | 50 | 70 | 15 | 20 | 30 | 28 | | 22 | | 30 | 3 | 32 | 632 |
| COBRA | 69 | 54 | 26 | 20 | 9 | 14 | 14 | 6 | 2 | 26 | 55 | 12 | | 6 | 9 | 322 |
| GBP | 15 | 28 | 35 | 29 | 68 | 9 | 27 | 23 | 9 | 24 | 9 | 6 | 7 | | 24 | 313 |
| Other | 156 | 149 | 200 | 158 | 200 | 209 | 312 | 211 | 78 | 75 | 87 | 67 | 42 | 42 | 391 | 2377 |
|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
| Total | 3221 | 3028 | 3098 | 3775 | 2190 | 2700 | 1494 | 2128 | 1193 | 1162 | 878 | 679 | 524 | 202 | 1330 | 27602 |
|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
Top 10 hostile days: (i.e. highest number of incs BF had on one particular day was 185)
Code:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| BF | 185 | 173 | 167 | 163 | 144 | 127 | 106 | 104 | 92 | 84 | 83 || 52.17% |
| p3n | 130 | 125 | 114 | 101 | 97 | 89 | 87 | 86 | 85 | 85 | 84 || 41.05% |
| Face | 239 | 239 | 210 | 175 | 174 | 162 | 158 | 154 | 137 | 129 | 128 || 45.88% |
| CT | 137 | 130 | 128 | 124 | 116 | 111 | 111 | 111 | 106 | 103 | 101 || 36.07% |
| RB | 114 | 112 | 111 | 111 | 109 | 101 | 101 | 88 | 86 | 82 | 81 || 40.96% |
| Ult | 149 | 129 | 124 | 123 | 110 | 109 | 107 | 104 | 102 | 100 | 96 || 41.79% |
| HR | 102 | 70 | 70 | 66 | 65 | 60 | 60 | 55 | 55 | 52 | 36 || 49.86% |
| ND | 102 | 92 | 71 | 70 | 66 | 64 | 59 | 58 | 56 | 53 | 52 || 44.23% |
| Norse | 79 | 77 | 37 | 32 | 21 | 20 | 20 | 19 | 18 | 17 | 16 || 54.35% |
| HODOR | 45 | 44 | 44 | 37 | 35 | 33 | 32 | 29 | 28 | 25 | 22 || 54.12% |
| Terra | 91 | 69 | 58 | 56 | 39 | 38 | 38 | 32 | 28 | 27 | 24 || 62.34% |
| ASC | 59 | 49 | 36 | 29 | 29 | 29 | 27 | 25 | 24 | 23 | 22 || 55.70% |
| COBRA | 39 | 35 | 21 | 21 | 20 | 19 | 15 | 15 | 11 | 10 | 9 || 66.77% |
| GBP | 27 | 23 | 20 | 20 | 19 | 19 | 16 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 13 || 64.54% |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Most hostile fleets from: (i.e. top hostile to BF were p3n and Faceless)
Code:
----------------------------------------------
| Black Flag | p3nguins | Faceless |
| p3nguins | RainbowS | Black Flag |
| Faceless | Black Flag | Conspiracy |
| Conspiracy | Ultores | Faceless |
| RainbowS | p3nguins | NewDawn |
| Ultores | Conspiracy | Black Flag |
| Howling Rain | p3nguins | Black Flag |
| NewDawn | RainbowS | Faceless |
| Norsemen | Conspiracy | HODORS |
| HODORS | Norsemen | Black Flag |
| Terra | Faceless | Howling Rain |
| ASSCENDANCY | Faceless | p3nguins |
| COBRA | Black Flag | Terra |
| GBP | RainbowS | Faceless |
----------------------------------------------
Stats for the first half of the round PT 0 - PT 528
Code:
| BF | p3n | Face | CT | RB | Ult | HR | ND | Norse | HODOR | Terra | ASC | COBRA | GBP | Other | Total |
|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
| BF | | 377 | 177 | 26 | 39 | 93 | 52 | 110 | 78 | 51 | 50 | 63 | 9 | | 42 | 1167 |
| p3n | 393 | | 185 | | 214 | 30 | 94 | 121 | 81 | 35 | 28 | 61 | 37 | 5 | 34 | 1318 |
| Face | 78 | 65 | | 68 | 108 | 26 | 103 | 316 | 29 | 142 | 11 | 165 | 37 | 8 | 41 | 1197 |
| CT | 76 | | 73 | | 80 | 1157 | 82 | 8 | 49 | 50 | 31 | 16 | 19 | 33 | 38 | 1712 |
| RB | 80 | 186 | 126 | 73 | | 2 | 73 | 80 | 19 | 38 | 18 | 54 | 6 | 35 | 29 | 819 |
| Ult | 134 | 48 | 90 | 1264 | 2 | | 38 | 46 | 21 | 36 | 14 | 27 | 17 | 10 | 20 | 1767 |
| HR | 104 | 109 | 145 | 93 | 51 | 24 | | 26 | 1 | 13 | 41 | 12 | 9 | 9 | 33 | 670 |
| ND | 142 | 93 | 257 | 5 | 96 | 34 | 34 | | 5 | 14 | 59 | 19 | 9 | 8 | 50 | 825 |
| Norse | 12 | 23 | 17 | 38 | 17 | 12 | 7 | 10 | | 79 | 7 | 8 | 2 | 3 | 19 | 254 |
| HODOR | 62 | 54 | 81 | 36 | 48 | 15 | 18 | 13 | 67 | | 18 | | 22 | 6 | 29 | 469 |
| Terra | 83 | 15 | 71 | 8 | 47 | 3 | 18 | 31 | 9 | 10 | | 4 | 1 | | 13 | 313 |
| ASC | 39 | 98 | 155 | 15 | 50 | 12 | 4 | 23 | 26 | | 2 | | 21 | | 21 | 466 |
| COBRA | 63 | 39 | 21 | 10 | 9 | 11 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 16 | 13 | 12 | | 6 | 6 | 214 |
| GBP | 15 | 21 | 35 | 27 | 50 | 9 | 12 | 16 | 9 | 18 | 3 | 6 | 7 | | 16 | 244 |
| Other | 134 | 100 | 126 | 76 | 88 | 87 | 134 | 107 | 37 | 48 | 51 | 49 | 10 | 18 | 116 | 1181 |
|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
| Total | 1415 | 1228 | 1559 | 1739 | 899 | 1515 | 673 | 909 | 433 | 550 | 346 | 496 | 206 | 141 | 507 | 12616 |
|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
Stats for the second half of the round PT 529 - PT 1153
Code:
| BF | p3n | Face | CT | RB | Ult | HR | ND | Norse | HODOR | Terra | ASC | COBRA | GBP | Other | Total |
|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
| BF | | 313 | 416 | 5 | 8 | 233 | 59 | 11 | 212 | 185 | 13 | 19 | 17 | | 79 | 1570 |
| p3n | 68 | | 151 | | 643 | | 153 | 37 | 66 | 24 | 46 | 16 | 69 | 14 | 33 | 1320 |
| Face | 1040 | 193 | | 693 | 39 | 12 | 133 | 298 | 170 | 126 | 39 | 32 | 54 | | 126 | 2955 |
| CT | 4 | | 415 | | 15 | 807 | 139 | | 187 | 48 | 99 | 25 | 30 | | 62 | 1831 |
| RB | 24 | 968 | 37 | 55 | | | 7 | 648 | | 44 | | 11 | | 2 | 61 | 1857 |
| Ult | 377 | | 2 | 745 | | | 1 | | 11 | 6 | 26 | 6 | 14 | | 43 | 1231 |
| HR | 164 | 172 | 66 | 138 | 5 | 2 | | | | 9 | 105 | 9 | 19 | 5 | 22 | 716 |
| ND | 8 | 17 | 193 | | 415 | | | | | 37 | 69 | 27 | 38 | | 51 | 855 |
| Norse | 34 | 21 | 35 | 174 | | | | | | 82 | 26 | 8 | | | 21 | 401 |
| HODOR | 43 | 8 | 11 | 5 | 16 | 1 | 9 | 35 | 48 | | 5 | | 19 | 11 | 11 | 222 |
| Terra | 13 | 33 | 101 | 92 | | 2 | 101 | 68 | 23 | 8 | | 12 | 17 | 2 | 17 | 489 |
| ASC | 3 | 4 | 33 | 35 | 20 | 3 | 16 | 7 | 2 | | 20 | | 9 | 3 | 11 | 166 |
| COBRA | 6 | 15 | 5 | 10 | | 3 | 10 | 4 | | 10 | 42 | | | | 3 | 108 |
| GBP | | 7 | | 2 | 18 | | 15 | 7 | | 6 | 6 | | | | 8 | 69 |
| Other | 22 | 49 | 74 | 82 | 112 | 122 | 178 | 104 | 41 | 27 | 36 | 18 | 32 | 24 | 275 | 1196 |
|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
| Total | 1806 | 1800 | 1539 | 2036 | 1291 | 1185 | 821 | 1219 | 760 | 612 | 532 | 183 | 318 | 61 | 823 | 14986 |
|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
Stats for the last 5 days: PT 1033 - PT 1153
Code:
| BF | p3n | Face | CT | RB | Ult | HR | ND | Norse | HODOR | Terra | ASC | COBRA | GBP | Other | Total |
|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
| BF | | | 46 | 2 | 1 | 10 | 47 | | 39 | 4 | 3 | 5 | | | 15 | 172 |
| p3n | | | 71 | | 23 | | 29 | | 3 | 12 | 15 | 9 | 10 | 4 | 13 | 189 |
| Face | 95 | 142 | | 65 | 11 | | 7 | | 29 | 17 | 15 | 2 | 30 | | 20 | 433 |
| CT | 1 | | 18 | | 4 | 192 | 30 | | | 29 | 48 | 6 | | | 21 | 349 |
| RB | 18 | 46 | 26 | 32 | | | | 242 | | 4 | | 9 | | 2 | 14 | 393 |
| Ult | 20 | | | 162 | | | | | 11 | | 13 | | 7 | | 6 | 219 |
| HR | 155 | 42 | 20 | 61 | 1 | | | | | | | 2 | 6 | 2 | 7 | 296 |
| ND | | | | | 131 | | | | | 5 | 3 | 2 | 6 | | 13 | 160 |
| Norse | 20 | 10 | 9 | 1 | | | | | | 27 | 5 | 2 | | | 7 | 81 |
| HODOR | 2 | 7 | 1 | 5 | 2 | | 1 | 1 | 21 | | | | | 5 | 3 | 48 |
| Terra | 7 | 13 | 26 | 28 | | | | 5 | 10 | 1 | | | 10 | 1 | 7 | 108 |
| ASC | | 1 | 2 | 17 | 12 | | 1 | 2 | 1 | | | | | | | 36 |
| COBRA | | 1 | 4 | 2 | | 3 | | 2 | | | 4 | | | | | 16 |
| GBP | | 5 | | 1 | 2 | | 3 | | | | | | | | | 11 |
| Other | 7 | 3 | 11 | 26 | 17 | 8 | 23 | 11 | 7 | | 7 | | 9 | 4 | 54 | 187 |
|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
| Total | 325 | 270 | 234 | 402 | 204 | 213 | 141 | 263 | 121 | 99 | 113 | 37 | 78 | 18 | 180 | 2698 |
|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
If anyone wants these stats for a particular tick period then feel free to PM me..
|
|
|
|
|
29 Sep 2015, 21:12
|
#12
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,386
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Quote:
Originally Posted by fortran
No reason. Maybe a little due to the talk about BF being the god of defense. But yeah round was decided in the political sphere. And IMHO, 4205 incs showed the other block slacked a little in attack aswell. I think the sum stagnation and stats were the main cause of that.
|
I don't see anyone stating anything remotely close to praising Black Flag's defence. The only praise given was at EORC by myself which deserved a mention because without the defence organisation, we would've been taken out in the first wave of concentrated incoming. I also praised Faceless' defence, too.
Yes, concentrated incoming. We did experience concentrated incoming even though people will claim otherwise. Our bulk of incoming was concentrated. There were about 3-4 coordinated attacks against us in periods of 3-4 days. Other than that, incoming was light.
And what's this speculation about blocks? There weren't really blocks this round. p3nguins helped Faceless periodically, and CT/HR etc helped BF for about 3-4 days, then it became a solo war.
I won't deny that Faceless experienced heavier hostilities than Black Flag, but from what I gather from the smaller tags, Faceless were bottom feeding and ended up antagonising those alliances.
It wasn't difficult to get support against Faceless when they shot off to #1 with a 16m lead at around tick 500. That was their fundamental mistake. This is called chess strategy because it's easy to influence people when X alliance is 15m+ ahead. This is why we use a stocking tactic (Ultores has used it too).
I will openly admit that Black Flag is not the best defensive alliance, but we have the organisation, member-base, discipline and DCs to put up a good fight, which is how we've managed to win the past two rounds. It's not just down to politics, even though politics has played a role in our success.
Faceless played a good round, and I have already congratulated some of their members on a good attempt. If they had won instead of Black Flag, then it would've been a deserved win for them too because they equally fought for it.
Stats were bad, but let this be a lesson to us all; don't let Tia do stats again!
Last edited by Clouds; 29 Sep 2015 at 21:20.
|
|
|
|
|
29 Sep 2015, 19:19
|
#13
|
|
Sain†s
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 331
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Nothing to argue with there. Makes a nice change!
__________________
☠ | ROCK | BowS | Sain†s
|
|
|
|
|
29 Sep 2015, 21:41
|
#14
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 40
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Interesting stats. Conspiracy were really bad at defending, only 1/3 recalls!
From a selfish point of view just looking at Terra and for a first round we didn't do too bad. More incoming a than most around us yet over 50% recalls which considering the strategy dictated no def first few weeks and having only 17 members (14 active) was a pretty good achievement. We'll see how next round goes as we had no political agenda this round, avoiding wars where possible (although faceless decided to target quite heavily at some point oddly , particularly since it was a time they could have still competed with BF for the win)
__________________
Kez
R62 Rogues Rank 192
R63 Terra Rank 39
R64 Terra - defence duties
R65 Faceless - defence duties
R66 Faceless - rank 90 (inactive half of round)
R67 Norseman - Rank 26
R68 Norseman - Rank 19
R69 P3nguins - Rank 22 - Scanner
R74 Faceless - Rank 4
R75 Heresy - Rank 15
R76 RaGe - Rank 4 - defence duties
|
|
|
|
|
29 Sep 2015, 23:36
|
#15
|
|
KK
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 662
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Pretty much shows that p3n didn't backstab fl in any way - and them breaking a nap to hit p3n was well thought out...clearly
|
|
|
|
|
30 Sep 2015, 00:23
|
#16
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 517
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krypton
Pretty much shows that p3n didn't backstab fl in any way - and them breaking a nap to hit p3n was well thought out...clearly
|
It was more like cancelling an agreement without warning all parts. It was really not a backstab.
__________________
mxy
|
|
|
|
|
30 Sep 2015, 07:39
|
#17
|
|
Dictator
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 634
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Clearly you dont know all the details but thats fine. Fl dropped a nap with no warning, no cool down and an agreement we had committed to til end of round.
Fl aren't worth shit anymore. This is twice they have dropped such naps with p3ng. We have had many opportunities to drop naps with them for our own gain but stuck with them. Sad to say they would rather have enemies than friends.
I'll make it clear now also. I have no problem hitting bows whilst they allow butcher to run their politics. They jump on the wagon as soon as they see amother ally getting inc but dislike the consequences. I stuck by bows for many rounds and convinced allies not to hit them when they had the chance. I've worked perfectly fine with their hc until it comes to butcher. If they want to talk and fix things then he isn't the one to do it.
Last edited by Munkee; 30 Sep 2015 at 07:51.
|
|
|
|
|
30 Sep 2015, 08:19
|
#18
|
|
Propaganda Chief
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Munkee
Clearly you dont know all the details but thats fine. Fl dropped a nap with no warning, no cool down and an agreement we had committed to til end of round.
Fl aren't worth shit anymore. This is twice they have dropped such naps with p3ng. We have had many opportunities to drop naps with them for our own gain but stuck with them. Sad to say they would rather have enemies than friends.
I'll make it clear now also. I have no problem hitting bows whilst they allow butcher to run their politics. They jump on the wagon as soon as they see amother ally getting inc but dislike the consequences. I stuck by bows for many rounds and convinced allies not to hit them when they had the chance. I've worked perfectly fine with their hc until it comes to butcher. If they want to talk and fix things then he isn't the one to do it.
|
I love how you are avoiding the obvious here. According to FL and many other allies p3ng had agreed to hit a certain target, claimed targets accordingly, then without telling the others in "the block", went hitting something else.
Sadly, BowS hadnt "jumped on the wagon", so i wernt in that "block channel", so i just go by what i was told, wich in my perfect little work sounds exactly like something p3nguins wouldve done.
__________________
RainbowS
RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
|
|
|
|
|
30 Sep 2015, 09:07
|
#19
|
|
Dictator
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 634
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Fl knew and were told we couldn't hit at 18:30.
Who are the many other allies? There's only ultores you could be referring to but of course you have to even exaggerate a comment like that to form another butcher argument. Theres good reasons why you aren't involved in discussions and it's mainly due to your mouth leaking so much shit you are a liability to anyones plans.
The band wagon reference is always in relation to bows jumping on a hit on p3ng. I have spoken with cr0 and greenie many times since p3ng came back and it always seems to involve a comment of "we dont know why butcher wants to hit you".
|
|
|
|
|
29 Sep 2015, 23:37
|
#20
|
|
KK
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 662
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Also clearly indicates Rainbows antagonized p3n into hitting them. Once again, BB thinking hitting an alliance without retaliation, then being retalled constitutes "bottom feeding". Fail
|
|
|
|
|
30 Sep 2015, 11:18
|
#21
|
|
Sain†s
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 331
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Getting away from the p3ng/FL/Bows shitfest for a moment, Bram's breakdown of stats actually does reveal how concentrated our incoming was on the few days that people willingly coordinated to hit us. The top four days we had 185, 173, 167 and 163 hostile fleets respectively, but those numbers drop off quickly after that, in a way that they don't for, say, FL or CT. On those nights though, we had our work cut out, and we covered quite a huge number of fleets with solid defensive organisation.
The other thing that the incoming stats don't accurately show is the number of fakes that landed anyway, and given that most of our concentrated incoming was from p3ng, and they quickly stopped sending real DE and started sending only fakes padded with CO, the recall numbers don't demonstrate how many fakes landed and failed to cap. It'd be interesting to understand how much of that was prevalent for other alliances, especially in a round where the stats were so generous to willing fakers.
__________________
☠ | ROCK | BowS | Sain†s
|
|
|
|
|
30 Sep 2015, 12:47
|
#22
|
|
mz.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,587
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tommy
The other thing that the incoming stats don't accurately show is the number of fakes that landed anyway, and given that most of our concentrated incoming was from p3ng, and they quickly stopped sending real DE and started sending only fakes padded with CO, the recall numbers don't demonstrate how many fakes landed and failed to cap. It'd be interesting to understand how much of that was prevalent for other alliances, especially in a round where the stats were so generous to willing fakers.
|
Agreed. A better stat would be 'landed and capped', not just 'landed'.
__________________
The outraged poets threw sticks and rocks over the side of the bridge. They were all missing Mary and he felt a contented smug feeling wash over him. He would have given them a coy little wave if the roof hadn't collapsed just then. Mary then found himself in the middle of an understandably shocked family's kitchen table. So he gave them the coy little wave and realized it probably would have been more effective if he hadn't been lying on their turkey.
|
|
|
|
|
1 Oct 2015, 15:52
|
#23
|
|
Retard0r
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Norway
Posts: 1,164
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
So in short; amongst the top 4, p3ng and BF had far less incs than CT and FL, with FL having 45-50% more incs than both. BF and p3ng had roughly the same incs as bows and ult(despite the former having 20% more members than the latter). Bows sent more fleets than BF and p3ng with 10 less members, as did FL and CT.
I'd say cudos to FL, CT and Bows for their activity. And cudos to BF for massnapping and dodging incs so they didnt have to put as much into it and still win.
__________________
-Chimpie
* We do not exist *
* G-II * NoS * VsN * Ascendancy * Osiris * xVx * Ultores *
|
|
|
|
|
1 Oct 2015, 16:11
|
#24
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,386
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrunkenViking
I'd say cudos to FL, CT and Bows for their activity. And cudos to BF for massnapping and dodging incs so they didnt have to put as much into it and still win.
|
It wasn't 'mass napping' as we only had agreements with a couple of alliances, I think it was more that folk were avoiding us.
And as I said in an earlier post, most of our incoming was concentrated, which means when we got hit, it was in the region of 250~ fleets a night. When there was no coordinated hostiles on us, incoming was very light.
To my knowledge, we had official agreements with HR/ND. Everyone else was neutral. If folk don't target us, then that's hardly our fault, and we're not going to get into wars just to improve our incoming stats to please the whining crybabies on here.
Last edited by Clouds; 1 Oct 2015 at 16:18.
|
|
|
|
|
1 Oct 2015, 16:19
|
#25
|
|
Propaganda Chief
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouds
And as I said in an earlier post, most of our incoming was concentrated, which means when we got hit, it was in the region of 250~ fleets a night. When there was no coordinated hostiles on us, incoming was very light.
|
Accusing you of comming with "bogus data" is getting a bit old, but aint the stats that bram gave us suggesting that your max incomming was 185 inc over a 24 hour period, and that you only had 6 days with 120+ incs?
__________________
RainbowS
RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
|
|
|
|
|
1 Oct 2015, 16:32
|
#26
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,386
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodyButcher
Accusing you of comming with "bogus data" is getting a bit old, but aint the stats that bram gave us suggesting that your max incomming was 185 inc over a 24 hour period, and that you only had 6 days with 120+ incs?
|
Our total incoming fleets does not mathematically make sense if you use Bram's "data". For example, if we did receive a maximum of 185 fleets for a maximum of 6 days, that's only a 1/4 of our total incoming. And besides, as I was personally DCing, I did see on some occasions hitting over 200 fleets, especially when p3n/FL/Ultores/norse/Hodors hit us.
We were coordinated against on 4 separate periods, each period lasting around 4 days, so that's about 16 days that we experienced concentrated incoming. On the first two periods, we experienced the highest amount of fleets (in the region of 200-220 a night), on the last two, it started to die down and it was around 120-150.
I haven't read Bram's stats personally myself, but if he's claiming that we received a maximum of 185 fleets a night, then his "stats" are wrong or he's lying. I don't need your approval or anyone elses for that matter, I personally witnessed the fleets on our defence page as I was helping to coordinate defence. Hell I even did a screenshot on one occasion which shows on that occasion we were on 210 fleets (I think it was the second wave of concentrated attacks). Of course, if anyone wants to see this screenshot to validate my claims, feel free to ask for it. I will not provide it on the forums due to upsetting the moderators with spam.
|
|
|
|
|
1 Oct 2015, 16:47
|
#27
|
|
Propaganda Chief
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouds
We were coordinated against on 4 separate periods, each period lasting around 4 days, so that's about 16 days that we experienced concentrated incoming. On the first two periods, we experienced the highest amount of fleets (in the region of 200-220 a night), on the last two, it started to die down and it was around 120-150.
|
Well im not math genious.
But what you saying is that over "hot" 4 days x 2 period you around 1600-1700 incs, and the "cold" 4 days x 2 period 1000-1100 incs, 16 days = 2600-2800, and the rest of the 49 day round you were averaging 5-6 incs each night?
__________________
RainbowS
RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
|
|
|
|
|
1 Oct 2015, 18:33
|
#28
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 245
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouds
Of course, if anyone wants to see this screenshot to validate my claims, feel free to ask for it. I will not provide it on the forums due to upsetting the moderators with spam.
|
At what tick was this?
|
|
|
|
|
1 Oct 2015, 18:43
|
#29
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 245
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodyButcher
Accusing you of comming with "bogus data" is getting a bit old, but aint the stats that bram gave us suggesting that your max incomming was 185 inc over a 24 hour period, and that you only had 6 days with 120+ incs?
|
One possible nuance: my data is per day.
I.e. - day 1 is PT 0 - 23
- day 2 is PT 24 - 47
- day 3 is PT 48 - 71
- ...
If incs landed around the tick at which the 'day switches' then some incs may be counted as part of the 'next' day..
Ofc we all know that most incs landing in the morning and not late in the evening so how much this effects the data remains to be seen.
Anyway, if I got some time later I'll post the number of incs per day.
|
|
|
|
|
1 Oct 2015, 16:20
|
#30
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 517
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Bram's data showed that on BF:
BF | 185 | 173 | 167 | 163 | 144 | 127 | 106 | 104 | 92 | 84
8 days with more than 100 fleets, none with more than 200.
__________________
mxy
|
|
|
|
|
1 Oct 2015, 17:31
|
#31
|
|
KK
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 662
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
And that you mention p3n and bows in the same mould is also laughable. Bows is a training alliance. P3n has veteran players who generally cant be assed to put the effort in to win - but they at least know how to
|
|
|
|
|
1 Oct 2015, 18:40
|
#32
|
|
Anti-Paperboy
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 174
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krypton
And that you mention p3n and bows in the same mould is also laughable. Bows is a training alliance. P3n has veteran players who generally cant be assed to put the effort in to win - but they at least know how to
|
I'd like to remind you Butcher Rogues was a joke and we beat you the first round(61) and were beating you the second until we kicked a bunch final tick. I bet 1v1 HR or ND could take you.
|
|
|
|
|
1 Oct 2015, 19:34
|
#33
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,386
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
http://i.imgur.com/GIIKeBT.png?1
The red highlight signifies hostiles which were p3nguins/Faceless at the time.
If Bram's data is accurate then I suppose the game itself is lying.
|
|
|
|
|
1 Oct 2015, 19:53
|
#34
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 245
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouds
http://i.imgur.com/GIIKeBT.png?1
The red highlight signifies hostiles which were p3nguins/Faceless at the time.
If Bram's data is accurate then I suppose the game itself is lying.
|
And you answered all but my question.
I asked what tick was that..
|
|
|
|
|
1 Oct 2015, 21:53
|
#35
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 245
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouds
http://i.imgur.com/GIIKeBT.png?1
The red highlight signifies hostiles which were p3nguins/Faceless at the time.
If Bram's data is accurate then I suppose the game itself is lying.
|
You also have a screenshot of the top of the alliance def page?
Checking the fleets suggest that this screenshot was taken between PT 659 and PT 660.
Latest fleet is at eta 7, these all had landing tick 666.
That means eta 1 was landing tick 660.
This matches with your fleets which are shown at eta 4 to 7:5:7 and that fleet had landing tick PT 663.
So the totals shown by PA should've shown the not yet recalled incs between PT 660 and PT 666.
Counting the attack and fake attack fleets shows 150 fleets vs 210 in your screenshot.
Counting the defend and fake defend fleets shows 131 fleets vs 149 in your screenshot. This difference can be explained by PL def fleets in the forts; the data I have only contains actually launches.
As for the attack fleets: atm I have no explanation why your screenshot shows 210 fleets..
The screenshot shows 52 attack fleets and 'your fleets defending in the alliance' shows an additional 8 fleets (well, 7 + 1 recall)
Checking the data I received contains all these 60 fleets.
It also contains another 90 fleets not in the screenshot.
Running the stats for PT 660 - PT 666
Code:
| BF | p3n | Face | CT | RB | Ult | HR | ND | Norse | HODOR | Terra | ASC | COBRA | GBP | Other | Total |
|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
| BF | | 49 | 69 | | | 17 | 2 | | | 10 | | | | | 3 | 150 |
|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
Now another set of data: HR did news all BF planets at PT 700.
Luckily: PT 660 - 666 nicely fits in the range of the news scans;
Unluckily: a news scan on a planet receiving a fleet does not show if it is hostile or not;
So need to take a bit of a guess: - if the planet sending a fleet is/was in the galaxy (or has eta 4) then it was a def fleet;
- if the planet sending a fleet is in BF then it was a confirmed def fleet (outgoing fleets do show the type in N scans and all BF were scanned)
- if the planet sending a fleet is not in BF then *very likely* it was an attack fleet;
Using my older tool to count the incs based on the news scan database and limiting it to Attack/Unknown fleets shows:
Code:
non Black Flag: 152
Black Flag: 0
Faceless: 71 --- p3nguins: 49 --- Ultores: 17 --- HODORS: 10 --- No Alliance: 3 --- Howling Rain: 2
So the data we got from News scans are very close to the data we got from the fleets as provided by the PA team.
The data is way off from the count in your screenshot..
I can think of three possibilities: - a bug on the alliance def page
- members in BF pre-reported 60 fleets with wrong landing ticks
- a photoshop job
There might be other reasons ofc..
But the stats I posted being wrong seems fairly unlikely since my other data source shows the very similar numbers.
|
|
|
|
|
1 Oct 2015, 22:06
|
#36
|
|
Sain†s
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 331
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Your data under-reports BF inc by ~200 fleets compared to the game's own stats (as it does everyone else's by a statistically significant amount), so I'm inclined to think something's up with your algorithm.
Note: I'm not questioning your analysis; I'm questioning your data. The screenshot Clouds posted is genuine, and most of BF will have seen the inc numbers on the busy nights.
__________________
☠ | ROCK | BowS | Sain†s
|
|
|
|
|
1 Oct 2015, 22:10
|
#37
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 245
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tommy
Your data under-reports BF inc by ~200 fleets compared to the game's own stats (as it does everyone else's by a statistically significant amount), so I'm inclined to think something's up with your algorithm.
|
I suggest you read the first lines of my post and check the first part of stats.
PA stats are not really correct in my opinion..
For alliance Black Flag it counts all the incoming of planets that were in Black Flag at PT 1153.
If a planet played outside of tag till PT 1151 and then joined tag at PT 1152 then it would count all its incs as 'Black Flag' incs; which is not correct IMO.
|
|
|
|
|
1 Oct 2015, 22:14
|
#38
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 245
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Incs per day: alliance based on when the fleet launched
Code:
Incs per day:
| Day | From | To || BF | p3n | Face | CT | RB | Ult | HR | ND | Norse | HODOR | Terra | ASC | COBRA | GBP | Other | Total |
|-----|------|------||-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
| 0 | 0 | 23 || 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 1 | 24 | 47 || 27 | 24 | 32 | 28 | 54 | 41 | 55 | 39 | 5 | 6 | 0 | 9 | 10 | 4 | 119 | 453 |
| 2 | 48 | 71 || 39 | 38 | 85 | 59 | 65 | 43 | 29 | 42 | 11 | 25 | 4 | 17 | 6 | 5 | 56 | 524 |
| 3 | 72 | 95 || 37 | 37 | 54 | 53 | 46 | 81 | 18 | 64 | 19 | 28 | 6 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 61 | 549 |
| 4 | 96 | 119 || 66 | 31 | 22 | 76 | 20 | 82 | 70 | 28 | 12 | 15 | 9 | 49 | 11 | 20 | 61 | 572 |
| 5 | 120 | 143 || 42 | 56 | 80 | 98 | 18 | 88 | 17 | 70 | 9 | 22 | 5 | 24 | 5 | 27 | 45 | 606 |
| 6 | 144 | 167 || 46 | 28 | 58 | 111 | 63 | 124 | 32 | 58 | 21 | 11 | 5 | 16 | 19 | 19 | 28 | 639 |
| 7 | 168 | 191 || 26 | 39 | 43 | 111 | 28 | 129 | 23 | 29 | 18 | 32 | 9 | 16 | 5 | 1 | 51 | 560 |
| 8 | 192 | 215 || 57 | 34 | 69 | 106 | 21 | 96 | 29 | 10 | 7 | 11 | 6 | 29 | 21 | 20 | 30 | 546 |
| 9 | 216 | 239 || 37 | 101 | 53 | 128 | 23 | 83 | 19 | 52 | 13 | 13 | 4 | 9 | 6 | 11 | 65 | 617 |
| 10 | 240 | 263 || 82 | 125 | 42 | 103 | 34 | 109 | 14 | 36 | 9 | 33 | 32 | 5 | 2 | 23 | 45 | 694 |
| 11 | 264 | 287 || 83 | 84 | 92 | 100 | 27 | 102 | 26 | 29 | 4 | 44 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 11 | 49 | 657 |
| 12 | 288 | 311 || 104 | 61 | 60 | 93 | 27 | 104 | 11 | 56 | 3 | 14 | 21 | 59 | 21 | 6 | 41 | 681 |
| 13 | 312 | 335 || 76 | 97 | 74 | 111 | 43 | 81 | 17 | 24 | 7 | 44 | 3 | 29 | 0 | 15 | 38 | 659 |
| 14 | 336 | 359 || 19 | 42 | 84 | 70 | 23 | 85 | 36 | 33 | 10 | 4 | 58 | 29 | 35 | 15 | 61 | 604 |
| 15 | 360 | 383 || 9 | 52 | 69 | 69 | 78 | 123 | 70 | 37 | 13 | 35 | 17 | 15 | 3 | 19 | 41 | 650 |
| 16 | 384 | 407 || 20 | 65 | 43 | 81 | 42 | 83 | 17 | 102 | 37 | 29 | 56 | 19 | 5 | 16 | 61 | 676 |
| 17 | 408 | 431 || 32 | 85 | 87 | 69 | 55 | 94 | 12 | 19 | 2 | 19 | 39 | 27 | 39 | 4 | 76 | 659 |
| 18 | 432 | 455 || 36 | 34 | 73 | 76 | 60 | 74 | 60 | 39 | 3 | 45 | 6 | 36 | 3 | 2 | 66 | 613 |
| 19 | 456 | 479 || 17 | 82 | 24 | 101 | 39 | 50 | 60 | 12 | 20 | 20 | 15 | 22 | 1 | 2 | 74 | 539 |
| 20 | 480 | 503 || 185 | 114 | 30 | 25 | 24 | 37 | 32 | 14 | 20 | 11 | 4 | 17 | 0 | 7 | 47 | 567 |
| 21 | 504 | 527 || 127 | 87 | 23 | 44 | 26 | 57 | 22 | 32 | 11 | 8 | 8 | 23 | 7 | 2 | 65 | 542 |
| 22 | 528 | 551 || 173 | 130 | 47 | 73 | 12 | 27 | 32 | 23 | 16 | 2 | 6 | 9 | 0 | 3 | 37 | 590 |
| 23 | 552 | 575 || 92 | 43 | 175 | 40 | 16 | 5 | 23 | 17 | 79 | 16 | 14 | 4 | 8 | 3 | 50 | 585 |
| 24 | 576 | 599 || 106 | 32 | 158 | 69 | 27 | 9 | 24 | 31 | 77 | 4 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 13 | 48 | 604 |
| 25 | 600 | 623 || 39 | 27 | 162 | 84 | 101 | 55 | 26 | 21 | 4 | 3 | 38 | 11 | 2 | 3 | 64 | 640 |
| 26 | 624 | 647 || 84 | 54 | 119 | 84 | 88 | 59 | 29 | 20 | 3 | 2 | 24 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 64 | 639 |
| 27 | 648 | 671 || 167 | 68 | 79 | 58 | 14 | 72 | 16 | 15 | 5 | 2 | 16 | 7 | 4 | 3 | 53 | 579 |
| 28 | 672 | 695 || 34 | 52 | 37 | 25 | 74 | 110 | 27 | 92 | 9 | 6 | 9 | 4 | 0 | 2 | 46 | 527 |
| 29 | 696 | 719 || 28 | 86 | 95 | 41 | 67 | 100 | 27 | 66 | 6 | 19 | 27 | 6 | 1 | 2 | 54 | 625 |
| 30 | 720 | 743 || 52 | 34 | 73 | 98 | 114 | 96 | 28 | 13 | 14 | 12 | 4 | 17 | 3 | 1 | 57 | 616 |
| 31 | 744 | 767 || 71 | 48 | 239 | 54 | 79 | 3 | 5 | 19 | 11 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 6 | 54 | 596 |
| 32 | 768 | 791 || 38 | 46 | 239 | 67 | 81 | 10 | 6 | 13 | 5 | 6 | 8 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 54 | 589 |
| 33 | 792 | 815 || 144 | 56 | 210 | 61 | 18 | 10 | 15 | 25 | 1 | 0 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 2 | 26 | 583 |
| 34 | 816 | 839 || 163 | 30 | 117 | 20 | 47 | 9 | 15 | 53 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 6 | 4 | 1 | 37 | 514 |
| 35 | 840 | 863 || 56 | 11 | 154 | 30 | 75 | 69 | 14 | 52 | 9 | 37 | 5 | 8 | 8 | 4 | 36 | 568 |
| 36 | 864 | 887 || 45 | 79 | 17 | 124 | 111 | 107 | 11 | 19 | 9 | 10 | 8 | 16 | 20 | 1 | 40 | 617 |
| 37 | 888 | 911 || 7 | 33 | 174 | 116 | 109 | 12 | 1 | 36 | 17 | 11 | 19 | 16 | 0 | 1 | 56 | 608 |
| 38 | 912 | 935 || 16 | 16 | 137 | 137 | 101 | 1 | 8 | 44 | 15 | 1 | 14 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 61 | 558 |
| 39 | 936 | 959 || 36 | 68 | 128 | 130 | 111 | 10 | 10 | 26 | 15 | 10 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 58 | 608 |
| 40 | 960 | 983 || 22 | 89 | 18 | 65 | 82 | 27 | 65 | 59 | 8 | 17 | 69 | 4 | 15 | 1 | 37 | 578 |
| 41 | 984 | 1007 || 3 | 60 | 33 | 37 | 86 | 149 | 31 | 25 | 6 | 5 | 91 | 0 | 4 | 2 | 39 | 571 |
| 42 | 1008 | 1031 || 22 | 69 | 111 | 67 | 54 | 73 | 8 | 22 | 7 | 4 | 7 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 38 | 489 |
| 43 | 1032 | 1055 || 13 | 39 | 117 | 67 | 53 | 65 | 13 | 43 | 4 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 9 | 7 | 34 | 471 |
| 44 | 1056 | 1079 || 71 | 21 | 129 | 53 | 53 | 82 | 55 | 71 | 9 | 6 | 18 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 30 | 600 |
| 45 | 1080 | 1103 || 30 | 85 | 37 | 68 | 72 | 20 | 102 | 25 | 10 | 9 | 38 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 45 | 548 |
| 46 | 1104 | 1127 || 21 | 17 | 40 | 81 | 76 | 28 | 66 | 14 | 15 | 13 | 12 | 25 | 6 | 1 | 40 | 455 |
| 47 | 1128 | 1151 || 30 | 28 | 101 | 76 | 112 | 22 | 52 | 9 | 32 | 15 | 28 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 34 | 546 |
| 48 | 1152 | 1175 || 7 | 1 | 9 | 6 | 27 | 2 | 8 | 2 | 11 | 5 | 6 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 5 | 91 |
| 49 | 1176 | 1199 || 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Total || 2737 | 2638 | 4152 | 3543 | 2676 | 2998 | 1386 | 1680 | 655 | 691 | 802 | 632 | 322 | 313 | 2377 | 27602 |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Incs per day: alliance based on alliance planet was in at PT 1153 - i.e. the PA method
Code:
| Day | From | To || BF | p3n | Face | CT | RB | Ult | HR | ND | Norse | HODOR | Terra | ASC | COBRA | GBP | Other | Total |
|-----|------|------||-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|
| 0 | 0 | 23 || 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 1 | 24 | 47 || 27 | 30 | 60 | 28 | 70 | 26 | 57 | 56 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 6 | 10 | 12 | 62 | 453 |
| 2 | 48 | 71 || 43 | 39 | 91 | 57 | 58 | 38 | 28 | 41 | 11 | 19 | 4 | 5 | 18 | 2 | 70 | 524 |
| 3 | 72 | 95 || 32 | 43 | 60 | 53 | 55 | 54 | 23 | 67 | 20 | 27 | 6 | 11 | 10 | 0 | 88 | 549 |
| 4 | 96 | 119 || 69 | 39 | 32 | 75 | 26 | 73 | 53 | 24 | 12 | 15 | 9 | 47 | 12 | 4 | 82 | 572 |
| 5 | 120 | 143 || 49 | 84 | 67 | 91 | 24 | 71 | 16 | 62 | 9 | 19 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 101 | 606 |
| 6 | 144 | 167 || 50 | 42 | 67 | 109 | 61 | 100 | 37 | 57 | 21 | 11 | 5 | 15 | 19 | 4 | 41 | 639 |
| 7 | 168 | 191 || 27 | 51 | 36 | 105 | 29 | 107 | 29 | 28 | 18 | 34 | 9 | 16 | 5 | 0 | 66 | 560 |
| 8 | 192 | 215 || 73 | 38 | 73 | 106 | 26 | 87 | 24 | 7 | 7 | 10 | 6 | 23 | 21 | 1 | 44 | 546 |
| 9 | 216 | 239 || 45 | 115 | 49 | 116 | 23 | 71 | 27 | 49 | 14 | 13 | 4 | 6 | 16 | 1 | 68 | 617 |
| 10 | 240 | 263 || 88 | 142 | 47 | 101 | 48 | 92 | 18 | 35 | 16 | 20 | 37 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 43 | 694 |
| 11 | 264 | 287 || 79 | 98 | 92 | 100 | 28 | 87 | 23 | 22 | 4 | 39 | 5 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 70 | 657 |
| 12 | 288 | 311 || 105 | 68 | 65 | 93 | 29 | 85 | 12 | 54 | 3 | 14 | 21 | 56 | 22 | 2 | 52 | 681 |
| 13 | 312 | 335 || 76 | 109 | 74 | 111 | 55 | 72 | 19 | 19 | 11 | 41 | 3 | 29 | 0 | 3 | 37 | 659 |
| 14 | 336 | 359 || 33 | 61 | 62 | 71 | 15 | 78 | 36 | 32 | 10 | 4 | 58 | 30 | 35 | 2 | 77 | 604 |
| 15 | 360 | 383 || 19 | 66 | 79 | 67 | 77 | 109 | 59 | 34 | 13 | 36 | 17 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 64 | 650 |
| 16 | 384 | 407 || 24 | 80 | 43 | 76 | 44 | 73 | 17 | 105 | 37 | 30 | 56 | 11 | 10 | 4 | 66 | 676 |
| 17 | 408 | 431 || 38 | 100 | 80 | 70 | 49 | 82 | 17 | 20 | 2 | 19 | 39 | 9 | 39 | 2 | 93 | 659 |
| 18 | 432 | 455 || 39 | 45 | 78 | 77 | 56 | 71 | 53 | 39 | 3 | 50 | 6 | 28 | 3 | 2 | 63 | 613 |
| 19 | 456 | 479 || 19 | 88 | 22 | 95 | 39 | 48 | 50 | 12 | 20 | 20 | 15 | 20 | 1 | 2 | 88 | 539 |
| 20 | 480 | 503 || 197 | 114 | 24 | 25 | 27 | 37 | 32 | 13 | 20 | 8 | 4 | 16 | 0 | 0 | 50 | 567 |
| 21 | 504 | 527 || 134 | 93 | 29 | 44 | 30 | 57 | 21 | 27 | 11 | 7 | 8 | 23 | 7 | 2 | 49 | 542 |
| 22 | 528 | 551 || 167 | 130 | 47 | 68 | 13 | 25 | 31 | 18 | 16 | 5 | 6 | 9 | 0 | 1 | 54 | 590 |
| 23 | 552 | 575 || 94 | 43 | 175 | 40 | 17 | 6 | 29 | 15 | 79 | 15 | 14 | 4 | 8 | 1 | 45 | 585 |
| 24 | 576 | 599 || 111 | 35 | 154 | 69 | 27 | 10 | 19 | 31 | 77 | 9 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 6 | 50 | 604 |
| 25 | 600 | 623 || 55 | 27 | 162 | 85 | 101 | 55 | 24 | 21 | 4 | 3 | 38 | 11 | 2 | 1 | 51 | 640 |
| 26 | 624 | 647 || 95 | 54 | 119 | 84 | 84 | 55 | 29 | 20 | 3 | 2 | 24 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 61 | 639 |
| 27 | 648 | 671 || 177 | 73 | 79 | 58 | 14 | 72 | 16 | 15 | 5 | 2 | 16 | 7 | 4 | 2 | 39 | 579 |
| 28 | 672 | 695 || 38 | 56 | 37 | 25 | 73 | 99 | 26 | 92 | 9 | 6 | 9 | 4 | 0 | 2 | 51 | 527 |
| 29 | 696 | 719 || 34 | 89 | 95 | 41 | 67 | 97 | 27 | 66 | 6 | 21 | 27 | 6 | 1 | 2 | 46 | 625 |
| 30 | 720 | 743 || 58 | 34 | 73 | 91 | 114 | 95 | 30 | 12 | 14 | 12 | 4 | 17 | 3 | 1 | 58 | 616 |
| 31 | 744 | 767 || 61 | 48 | 239 | 55 | 89 | 3 | 8 | 19 | 11 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 52 | 596 |
| 32 | 768 | 791 || 51 | 46 | 239 | 66 | 81 | 10 | 6 | 11 | 5 | 6 | 8 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 44 | 589 |
| 33 | 792 | 815 || 141 | 56 | 210 | 51 | 18 | 10 | 16 | 22 | 1 | 0 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 2 | 41 | 583 |
| 34 | 816 | 839 || 166 | 30 | 117 | 20 | 47 | 11 | 15 | 53 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 6 | 4 | 1 | 31 | 514 |
| 35 | 840 | 863 || 56 | 11 | 154 | 30 | 75 | 67 | 17 | 52 | 9 | 37 | 5 | 8 | 8 | 4 | 35 | 568 |
| 36 | 864 | 887 || 52 | 79 | 17 | 122 | 113 | 104 | 11 | 19 | 9 | 8 | 8 | 16 | 20 | 1 | 38 | 617 |
| 37 | 888 | 911 || 7 | 39 | 174 | 113 | 117 | 12 | 1 | 36 | 17 | 11 | 19 | 16 | 0 | 1 | 45 | 608 |
| 38 | 912 | 935 || 26 | 16 | 137 | 136 | 111 | 1 | 9 | 44 | 15 | 1 | 14 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 41 | 558 |
| 39 | 936 | 959 || 36 | 68 | 128 | 127 | 115 | 10 | 10 | 26 | 15 | 10 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 57 | 608 |
| 40 | 960 | 983 || 22 | 89 | 18 | 61 | 83 | 27 | 71 | 59 | 8 | 17 | 69 | 4 | 15 | 1 | 34 | 578 |
| 41 | 984 | 1007 || 3 | 60 | 33 | 37 | 87 | 148 | 31 | 25 | 6 | 7 | 91 | 0 | 4 | 2 | 37 | 571 |
| 42 | 1008 | 1031 || 27 | 69 | 111 | 67 | 54 | 72 | 8 | 22 | 7 | 4 | 7 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 34 | 489 |
| 43 | 1032 | 1055 || 13 | 39 | 117 | 67 | 53 | 65 | 17 | 43 | 4 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 9 | 6 | 31 | 471 |
| 44 | 1056 | 1079 || 71 | 21 | 129 | 53 | 53 | 82 | 55 | 71 | 9 | 6 | 18 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 30 | 600 |
| 45 | 1080 | 1103 || 30 | 85 | 37 | 68 | 72 | 20 | 104 | 25 | 10 | 9 | 38 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 43 | 548 |
| 46 | 1104 | 1127 || 21 | 17 | 40 | 81 | 76 | 28 | 67 | 14 | 15 | 13 | 12 | 25 | 6 | 1 | 39 | 455 |
| 47 | 1128 | 1151 || 30 | 28 | 101 | 76 | 112 | 22 | 52 | 9 | 32 | 15 | 28 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 34 | 546 |
| 48 | 1152 | 1175 || 7 | 1 | 11 | 9 | 28 | 2 | 9 | 2 | 11 | 5 | 6 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 8 | 101 |
| 49 | 1176 | 1199 || 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Total || 2915 | 2888 | 4183 | 3470 | 2763 | 2726 | 1389 | 1645 | 668 | 671 | 808 | 539 | 344 | 100 | 2503 | 27612 |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
1 Oct 2015, 22:15
|
#39
|
|
Sain†s
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 331
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bram
I suggest you read the first lines of my post and check the first part of stats.
PA stats are not really correct in my opinion..
For alliance Black Flag it counts all the incoming of planets that were in Black Flag at PT 1153.
If a planet played outside of tag till PT 1151 and then joined tag at PT 1152 then it would count all its incs as 'Black Flag' incs; which is not correct IMO.
|
I did read that, and considering we experienced our heaviest incs early on, and then a few people left for other tags, I'd expect this to cause our incs to be under-reported by the game rather than over-reported. For instance, rushed's incs wouldn't be counted towards our total at all, but rather FL's, even though he was involved in the initial wars with p3ng and FL.
Ragequitting to join the people that roid you is a funny one, though!
__________________
☠ | ROCK | BowS | Sain†s
|
|
|
|
|
1 Oct 2015, 22:46
|
#40
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 245
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tommy
I did read that, and considering we experienced our heaviest incs early on, and then a few people left for other tags, I'd expect this to cause our incs to be under-reported by the game rather than over-reported. For instance, rushed's incs wouldn't be counted towards our total at all, but rather FL's, even though he was involved in the initial wars with p3ng and FL.
Ragequitting to join the people that roid you is a funny one, though!
|
Ok, time to count I guess..
BF members that changed: - Planet 6:7:8 joined at PT 89: 1 inc before joining, 44 after
- Planet 1:3:9 joined at PT 93: 2 incs before joining, 103 after
- Planet 1:7:8 joined at PT 93: 0 incs before joining, 24 after
- Planet 5:7:2 joined at PT 94: 0 before, 14 after
- Planet 2:5:8 joined at PT 94: 0 before, 23 after
- Planet 4:6:2 joined at PT 97 and left at PT 379: PT 0-96: 0 incs, PT 97 - PT 379: 5 incs, PT 379-1153: 16 incs
- Planet 6:3:8(*) deleted/resetted at PT 111: 2 incs before
- Planet 2:5:9 joined at PT 113: 0 before, 11 after
- Planet 7:8:3(*) deleted/resetted at PT 116: 4 incs before
- Planet 1:9:9 joined at PT 122: 0 before, 23 after
- Planet 1:10:10 joined at PT 229: 8 before, 9 after
- Planet 4:6:1 left at PT 377: 3 before, 11 after
- Planet 3:8:2 joined at PT 422: 44 before, 67 after
- Planet 4:8:8 joined at PT 422: 41 before, 40 after
- Planet 5:10:9 left at PT 790: 38 before, 0 after
- Planet 5:7:3 joined at PT 812: 94 before, 44 after
- Planet 3:9:10 joined at PT 1031: 55 before, 12 after
- Planet 2:5:8 left at PT 1031: 23 before, 0 after
(*): not the current coordinates
Summary:- under-reporting::
- 5 incs on 4:6:2
- 2 incs on 6:3:8(*)
- 4 incs on 7:8:3(*)
- 3 incs on 4:6:1
- 38 incs on 5:10:9
- 23 incs on 2:5:8
- over-reporting:
- 1 inc on 6:7:8
- 2 incs on 1:3:9
- 8 incs on 1:10:10
- 44 incs on 3:8:2
- 41 incs on 4:8:8
- 94 incs on 5:7:3
- 55 incs on 3:9:10
Total: - under-reported: 75 incs
- over-reported: 245 incs
Final summary: over reporting of 170 fleets in PA stats.
|
|
|
|
|
1 Oct 2015, 23:04
|
#41
|
|
Propaganda Chief
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
What ever is right or wrong, Clouds claim that they had between 2600-2800 incs on 16 days seems to be a little off, since 25% of the total BF incs came on days where they had less than 50 fleets.
27 days with below 50 incs, 750ish fleets in total.
8 days with 120 incs, 950ish fleets in total.
8 days with 200 incs, 1600ish fleets in total.
5 days with 51-119 incs, -400ish fleets in total.
That adds up to 2900ish fleets over a whole round, based on the PA method of counting and the Clouds method of counting.
Seems about right.
__________________
RainbowS
RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
|
|
|
|
|
1 Oct 2015, 22:11
|
#42
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,386
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
I was waiting for excuses such as:
- photoshoped or
- manually added fake incoming
While the former is possible, I neither have the technogical skills to perform such a task nor would I put effort into such a pointless debate. This screenshot came directly from my mobile device.
The latter is not possible because (as far as I'm aware) you can only report incoming in conjunction with incoming scans. I know this because I have tested it. It returns with an error message if you try and manually add incoming if there is no valid incoming scan performed.
I'm not going to get into a crippled debate over your stats. Who cares. I certainly don't. I was merely providing the screenshot to show I wasn't lying when I said that on some nights we experienced over 200 fleets.
Last edited by Clouds; 1 Oct 2015 at 22:16.
|
|
|
|
|
1 Oct 2015, 22:48
|
#43
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,386
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
What I find amusing is that your stats are from a third party source, which means while you feel your stats are accurate, it doesn't make it factual.
A Planetarion player, which is not part of the PA Team in any form, coded this tool. Your tools may or may not be accurate, but if we are to look at this from a logical point of view, we are taking the word from one person outside of the official Planetarion Team circle and not using data directly from official Planetarion elements such as dumps, rather you're scanning the universe. This means your stats can't be used as accurate data in this debate.
Your tools are helpful, but please don't assume you can use them to prove an argument when they aren't sourced from official elements.
Last edited by Clouds; 1 Oct 2015 at 23:02.
|
|
|
|
|
1 Oct 2015, 22:57
|
#44
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 245
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouds
What I find amusing is that your stats are from a third party source, which means while you feel your stats are accurate, it doesn't make it factual.
|
I still got all the N scans done on Black Flag at PT 700.
You want them?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouds
A Planetarion player, which is not part of the PA Team in any form, coded this tool. Your tools may or may not be accurate, but if we are to look at this from a logical point of view, we are taking the word from one person outside of the official Planetarion Team circle, which means your stats can't be used as accurate data in this debate.
|
While that is true and it is your good right to think of my stats as not accurate and not trust-worthy.
What I do know is that Black Flag in the past has frequently over-stated their inc counts. Time and time again this has been shown by N scanning Black Flag during the round.
What numbers you choose to believe is your own choiche. I however do know the stats I made based on data provided by PA are accurate. Does that mean a thing for someone else? Nope; not at all.
|
|
|
|
|
1 Oct 2015, 23:28
|
#45
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 245
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouds
not using data directly from official Planetarion elements such as dumps, rather you're scanning the universe. This means your stats can't be used as accurate data in this debate.
|
(Oh changing your post after I already quoted it and replied to it.. - how nice of you)
Anyway, your new edit is a fail.
My very first sentence:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bram
The following is based on data about fleet launches provided by the PA team.
|
Let me repeat myself again:
The raw data based on which the 'inc-breakdown' is created was provided by the PA team.
The raw data based on which the 'number of incs per day' is created was provided by the PA team.
And once more: the raw data based on which all this was created was not obtained by scanning the universe
Did we constantly N scan the universe? No we did not.
Our scanners did news scan the universe the last 8-9 days tho;
What we did do during the round was occasianlly news scan some alliances..
News scans on Black Flag were done on several ocassions for several reasons: - seeing how much incs they really had (since their claims have proven not to be trustworthy in the past);
- seeing who Black Flag was hitting and with how many fleets/waves.
When we were hitting Faceless and/or p3nguins we also did a news scans them. This to see how many fleets actually launched and by who (and seeing how this corresponded with the targets that were claimed).
Does any of this matter? Nope since that data was NOT used in my first posts.
That data was only used later as an additional source to also show the inc count was 150 and not 210 as shown in the screenshot.
Why it shows 210 in the screenshot is something I can not answer. Bug in PA? Photsohop?
|
|
|
|
|
1 Oct 2015, 22:53
|
#46
|
|
Sain†s
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 331
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
I'll accept that. I also stand by my assertion that the game did report 210 fleets at the tick the screenshot was taken, and frequently reported more than you suggest. Mind you, I reported incorrect fleet numbers two or three rounds ago, and as far as I know, cin fixed it.
Well, probably fixed it.
Who am I kidding? This is PA.
__________________
☠ | ROCK | BowS | Sain†s
|
|
|
|
|
1 Oct 2015, 23:12
|
#47
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,386
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
I didn't say we experienced over 200 fleets everytime, I said that we experienced this on some occasions. You're just twisting my words.
|
|
|
|
|
1 Oct 2015, 23:32
|
#48
|
|
Propaganda Chief
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouds
I didn't say we experienced over 200 fleets everytime, I said that we experienced this on some occasions. You're just twisting my words.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouds
We were coordinated against on 4 separate periods, each period lasting around 4 days, so that's about 16 days that we experienced concentrated incoming. On the first two periods, we experienced the highest amount of fleets (in the region of 200-220 a night), on the last two, it started to die down and it was around 120-150.
|
I know my English lets me down a little bit too often.
The first two period you experinced 200-220 fleets A night.
The last two periods it died down to 120-150 fleets, assuming your still talking about " A night".
If im to understand what you are trying to say(that shouldnt be a goal for you) id rather see you writing something like you had X-220 fleets and X-150 fleets a night.
__________________
RainbowS
RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
|
|
|
|
|
1 Oct 2015, 23:19
|
#49
|
|
Sain†s
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 331
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Things we've learned today:
- Everyone got incs!
- Some people got more than others
- PA Team can't count
- PA Team can't code
- Bram claims he can count, but we only have Bram's word for this
- HR have no ally fund left
- BB doesn't get along with people, or penguins
__________________
☠ | ROCK | BowS | Sain†s
|
|
|
|
|
1 Oct 2015, 23:31
|
#50
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 245
|
Re: Inc stats discussion pos R63
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tommy
Things we've learned today:
- Bram claims he can count, but we only have Bram's word for this
|
You don't have to take my word for it..
As I said: we still got the News scans done on Black Flag at PT 700.
If you want you can go count yourself how many fleets there were with landing tick between PT 660 and 667.
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:41.
| |
Alien Invasion
Submarine
Tiger Punch
Barts Watersports Adventure
Hybrid Mode