Nut Shot's Conqueror's Cup Player Rankings - UPDATED

[Nut Shot Scott]

In Progress!

Due to popular (or like four people) demand, I will be expanding my individual clan league rankings to Conqueror's Cup as well. It's a little more complex and less straightforward so it's slower going. Any feedback from previous rankings and/or ideas are welcome! Stay tuned!

CCXI - Completed!
CCX - Completed!
CC9 - Completed!

See the progress here:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing

The largest difference between League and Cup scoring that you will see is a tiered bonus system.

Round 1 - 0% bonus
Round 2 - 5% point bonus
Round 3 (if applicable) - 10% point bonus
Semi-finals - 15% point bonus
Finals - 30% point bonus

CCXI Top 25

Spoiler

1 - rcfritz - FALL 2 - Donelladan - LHDD 3 - _Untouchable - LHDD 4 - mc05025 - FALL 5 - rockfist - TOFU 6 - Unai - LHDD 7 - donche64 - LHDD 8 - GoranZ - FALL 9 - t4mcr53s2 - FALL 10 - samdemars - LHDD 11 - Doc_Brown - TOFU 12 - osman76 - FALL 13 - ZaBeast - LHDD 14 - Astoriana - S&M 15 - Zorro134 - FALL 16 - nokelberry - FALL 17 - ballenus - S&M 18 - Paengars - LHDD 19 - agentcom - FALL 20 - davekettering - S&M 21 - fred299229 - LHDD 22 - rousseau72 - FALL 23 - AlexV - LHDD 24 - volrazz - LHDD 25 - altoque - LHDD

CCX Top 25

Spoiler

1 - josko.ri - S & M 2 - JPlo64 - FOED 3 - kjg21 - S & M 4 - loutil - TOFU 5 - IanG7 - S & M 6 - Astoriana - S & M 7 - rockfist - TOFU 8 - Doc_Brown - TOFU 9 - niMic - S & M 10 - Tin Trumpet - ATL 11 - MTIceman41 - S & M 12 - Chariot of Fire - TOFU 13 - Denise - TOFU 14 - Donelladan - LHDD 15 - davekettering - S & M 16 - emilywink - S & M 17 - groovysmurf - FOED 18 - PROFITS - TOFU 19 - ballenus - S & M 20 - grt - TOFU 21 - Sanguis - TOFU 22 - Extreme Ways - TOFU 23 - All Black Rugby - S & M 24 - joecoolfrog - TOFU 25 - denthefrog - S & M

CC9 Top 25

Spoiler

1 - Donelladan - LHDD 2 - JPlo64 - FOED 3 - ZaBeast - LHDD 4 - _Untouchable - LHDD 5 - betiko - LHDD 6 - samdemars - LHDD 7 - Fyrdraca - FOED 8 - Conchobar - FOED 9 - niMic - S&M 10 - -1-1-3- - LHDD 11 - fred299229 - LHDD 12 - donche64 - LHDD 13 - groovysmurf - FOED 14 - fairman - LHDD 15 - dragon dor - LHDD 16 - JELO - LHDD 17 - Paengars - LHDD 18 - rockfist - TOFU 19 - The_Samurai - RET 20 - Juris - FOED 21 - Astoriana - S&M 22 - Swifte - S&M 23 - benga - OSA 24 - ballenus - S&M 25 - All Black Rugby - S&M

[IcePack]

Woohoo!

[Extreme Ways]

Quite interested how you'll tackle this.

[Nut Shot Scott]

Quite interested how you'll tackle this.

me too ha

[rockfist]

I would reiterate my contention that later rounds (finals/semi finals) should be heavier weighted than early rounds. I don't think it makes any difference if you go 9-2 vs 11-0 in the first round, but 9-4 vs 7-6 in the semi finals is a big deal. I know we play around with who is on what teams and what boards we send in early rounds and I imagine other top clans do the same.

Maybe a 1,2,3,4 weighting system or something like that?

[Nut Shot Scott]

I would reiterate my contention that later rounds (finals/semi finals) should be heavier weighted than early rounds. I don't think it makes any difference if you go 9-2 vs 11-0 in the first round, but 9-4 vs 7-6 in the semi finals is a big deal.

Maybe a 1,2,3,4 rating system or something like that?

Yes, I do agree. I intend to add an escalating % as the rounds go up. Between that and the far more complicated data collection - each matchup having it's own set is far more time consuming to go through - it will be a slog. But I am committed!

[i-andrei]

I would reiterate my contention that later rounds (finals/semi finals) should be heavier weighted than early rounds. I don't think it makes any difference if you go 9-2 vs 11-0 in the first round, but 9-4 vs 7-6 in the semi finals is a big deal.

Maybe a 1,2,3,4 rating system or something like that?

Yes, I do agree. I intend to add an escalating % as the rounds go up. Between that and the far more complicated data collection - each matchup having it's own set is far more time consuming to go through - it will be a slog. But I am committed!

That's flawed, cause it takes into account the round, not the oponent.
You can use the rankings at that point in rimw, but it s more difficult to handle..

[Nut Shot Scott]

That's flawed, cause it takes into account the round, not the oponent.
You can use the rankings at that point in rimw, but it s more difficult to handle..

So you're saying if you are a lower seed and you upset a higher seed in round 1, then end up with a lesser opponent in round 2, you should not then be given a "bonus" for the second round because the first round was technically a tougher opponent?

if so, i can see both sides of that coin. the beauty of it is, it's just math. can always try it one way and then the other, see what shakes out.

[Donelladan]

I would reiterate my contention that later rounds (finals/semi finals) should be heavier weighted than early rounds. I don't think it makes any difference if you go 9-2 vs 11-0 in the first round, but 9-4 vs 7-6 in the semi finals is a big deal.

Maybe a 1,2,3,4 rating system or something like that?

Yes, I do agree. I intend to add an escalating % as the rounds go up. Between that and the far more complicated data collection - each matchup having it's own set is far more time consuming to go through - it will be a slog. But I am committed!

That's flawed, cause it takes into account the round, not the oponent.
You can use the rankings at that point in rimw, but it s more difficult to handle..

Using ranking wouldn't be less flawed because ranking is always a couple of month late compared to current clan shape.

If one clan is able to move forward while being low ranked, then ranking was wrong, hence round makes more sense.
I'd take as example the CC5 conquer cup that LHDD started as underdog where we lost in the semi against FALL 31/30, and probably vey few clan expected us to go through the 2nd round since we were ranked 13th back then. But LHDD was on the rise and the higher seeded clan back then (PACK ranked 4th then TSM ranked 5th) were declining.

[rockfist]

I disagree with using rankings.

What ranking system would you use? The D400 lags actual performance by some measure. The tournament seeding uses historical tournament results and the D400 when you sign up, which can lag even further behind. For instance Fallen won CC5 but were ranked 9th or 10th (I'm guessing here) in the D400 or so when the tournament started. They were ranked #1 when it was all over, however (and I'm guessing here again) 4th or 5th in D400 when the finals started.

I think in order to measure current performance at the time the event took place you have to measure what round its in and weight it according to that. This isn't a tournament where you get through many rounds by luck, you have to be pretty good to advance very far in it. Look at the roll of winners, finalists, and semi-finalists. There are some one offs in there but for the most part its a who's who of the best historical clans.

[rockfist]

I would reiterate my contention that later rounds (finals/semi finals) should be heavier weighted than early rounds. I don't think it makes any difference if you go 9-2 vs 11-0 in the first round, but 9-4 vs 7-6 in the semi finals is a big deal.

Maybe a 1,2,3,4 rating system or something like that?

Yes, I do agree. I intend to add an escalating % as the rounds go up. Between that and the far more complicated data collection - each matchup having it's own set is far more time consuming to go through - it will be a slog. But I am committed!

That's flawed, cause it takes into account the round, not the oponent.
You can use the rankings at that point in rimw, but it s more difficult to handle..

Using ranking wouldn't be less flawed because ranking is always a couple of month late compared to current clan shape.

If one clan is able to move forward while being low ranked, then ranking was wrong, hence round makes more sense.
I'd take as example the CC5 conquer cup that LHDD started as underdog where we lost in the semi against FALL 31/30, and probably vey few clan expected us to go through the 2nd round since we were ranked 13th back then. But LHDD was on the rise and the higher seeded clan back then (PACK ranked 4th then TSM ranked 5th) were declining.

I agree.

[2dimes]

How are the Scions of Glory doing in this?

[niMic]

This is turning out to be the greatest set of content in CC history. Unless this one happens to reveal that I'm a fraud, in which case I will be submitting a Right To Be Forgotten claim through GDPR.

[Nut Shot Scott]

This is turning out to be the greatest set of content in CC history. Unless this one happens to reveal that I'm a fraud, in which case I will be submitting a Right To Be Forgotten claim through GDPR.

[JPlo64]

I would combine weight by round and D400 rank into one coefficient. I would use last rank before the war ended (if war ends July 4 2021, use July 1 2021 rank)
If you don't, you have players getting an unadjusted advantage by the luck of the draw.
You can go back and find examples of clans having unusually easy quarterfinals or difficult round of 16 matchups which will increase the luck factor in your final results.
Rankings aren't perfect, there will be lag in rises and falls, but generally it's a good barometer of strength.

I would reiterate my contention that later rounds (finals/semi finals) should be heavier weighted than early rounds. I don't think it makes any difference if you go 9-2 vs 11-0 in the first round, but 9-4 vs 7-6 in the semi finals is a big deal.

Maybe a 1,2,3,4 rating system or something like that?

Yes, I do agree. I intend to add an escalating % as the rounds go up. Between that and the far more complicated data collection - each matchup having it's own set is far more time consuming to go through - it will be a slog. But I am committed!

That's flawed, cause it takes into account the round, not the oponent.
You can use the rankings at that point in rimw, but it s more difficult to handle..

Using ranking wouldn't be less flawed because ranking is always a couple of month late compared to current clan shape.

If one clan is able to move forward while being low ranked, then ranking was wrong, hence round makes more sense.
I'd take as example the CC5 conquer cup that LHDD started as underdog where we lost in the semi against FALL 31/30, and probably vey few clan expected us to go through the 2nd round since we were ranked 13th back then. But LHDD was on the rise and the higher seeded clan back then (PACK ranked 4th then TSM ranked 5th) were declining.

I disagree with using rankings.

What ranking system would you use? The D400 lags actual performance by some measure. The tournament seeding uses historical tournament results and the D400 when you sign up, which can lag even further behind. For instance Fallen won CC5 but were ranked 9th or 10th (I'm guessing here) in the D400 or so when the tournament started. They were ranked #1 when it was all over, however (and I'm guessing here again) 4th or 5th in D400 when the finals started.

I think in order to measure current performance at the time the event took place you have to measure what round its in and weight it according to that. This isn't a tournament where you get through many rounds by luck, you have to be pretty good to advance very far in it. Look at the roll of winners, finalists, and semi-finalists. There are some one offs in there but for the most part its a who's who of the best historical clans.

[Nut Shot Scott]

Yeah. The data collection alone is incredibly time consuming - with each matchup having it's own thread, it's a pain in the ass plus the sheer volume of teams and players is much higher than an 8 or 10 team league season that I can get all in one spot. Going through and assigning individual adjustments based upon a formula that combines D400 and round is probably not happening. What you'll likely see me do is assign nothing to the early rounds while adding a small bump to semi final matchups and an additional small bump to finals matchups. If you make it to the semis, my assumption will be that you are playing a solid team. If you upset someone in the first round, good on you. Your bump is that you got the extra games and wins that you weren't expected to have, giving your scores a boost.

There will also be no adjusted scores because there is no expected number of games - so if your team consistently goes deep in the tournament, your players should be ranked higher due to the increase in games.

[niMic]

There will also be no adjusted scores because there is no expected number of games - so if your team consistently goes deep in the tournament, your players should be ranked higher due to the increase in games.

Interesting. I suspect this is going to hurt KORT/S&M and some of the other bigger strong clans, who have traditionally (had the ability to) spread out games a lot more between the members. I'm curious if that's going to be the case, can't wait to see the results.

[niMic]

There will also be no adjusted scores because there is no expected number of games - so if your team consistently goes deep in the tournament, your players should be ranked higher due to the increase in games.

Interesting. I suspect this is going to hurt KORT/S&M and some of the other bigger strong clans, who have traditionally (had the ability to) spread out games a lot more between the members. It'll be very interesting seeing the results!

[rockfist]

I'd be surprised if anyone will outrank Josko at this (I highly doubt I would or should) ...although Don has some impressive results.

[josko.ri]

Make weighting factors 100% finals, 80% semifinals, 60% quarterfinals, 40% Round of 16, 20% Round of 32 and 10% round of 64.

[Nut Shot Scott]

I started with CCX and it MIGHT be done by end of next week. Have gone with a 5% point bump per round.

[Conchobar]

Wow someone really has a lot of time on his hands hiding from the heatwave this summer. Good luck with this!!

[i-andrei]

Wow someone really has a lot of time on his hands hiding from the heatwave this summer. Good luck with this!!

oh no...now you're gonna get 'The Story' behind it...

[niMic]

I started with CCX and it MIGHT be done by end of next week. Have gone with a 5% point bump per round.

5% seems quite low, speaking from experience. But you're the boss.

Wait... are you the boss?

[Nut Shot Scott]

I started with CCX and it MIGHT be done by end of next week. Have gone with a 5% point bump per round.

5% seems quite low, speaking from experience. But you're the boss.

Wait... are you the boss?

That's a 20% bump by the finals. I actually wouldn't have gone that high but the people seem to want it haha