Conquer Club

IcePack wrote:Another question, does anyone care to see the weights? If it falls below 150 it automatically is removed off the list. Is this something most people are really curious to see or can i remove it from the updates?

Let me know,
Ice

I like the weights b/c it basically shows who the most active/inactive clans are in regards to warring.

I don't understand why there was no points change for MD. If I am interpreting a former post correctly, the two results being added were an 11-1 victory vs. MB and a 53-14 victory vs. YNWA. They're both near the bottom of the rankings, but those are decisive victories. Perhaps less favorable results were also included? Either way, I find it strange to have absolutely no change in the total score when results are coming in.

ViperOverLord wrote:I don't understand why there was no points change for MD. If I am interpreting a former post correctly, the two results being added were an 11-1 victory vs. MB and a 53-14 victory vs. YNWA. They're both near the bottom of the rankings, but those are decisive victories. Perhaps less favorable results were also included? Either way, I find it strange to have absolutely no change in the total score when results are coming in.

Those two war results were already included, those are over a month old?

IcePack wrote:

ViperOverLord wrote:I don't understand why there was no points change for MD. If I am interpreting a former post correctly, the two results being added were an 11-1 victory vs. MB and a 53-14 victory vs. YNWA. They're both near the bottom of the rankings, but those are decisive victories. Perhaps less favorable results were also included? Either way, I find it strange to have absolutely no change in the total score when results are coming in.

Those two war results were already included, those are over a month old?

You mentioned checking the last six weeks of results. I guess more accurately, you were including the last four weeks of results. So, I see what happened now.

viewtopic.php?f=438&t=174424&start=945

ViperOverLord wrote:

IcePack wrote:

ViperOverLord wrote:I don't understand why there was no points change for MD. If I am interpreting a former post correctly, the two results being added were an 11-1 victory vs. MB and a 53-14 victory vs. YNWA. They're both near the bottom of the rankings, but those are decisive victories. Perhaps less favorable results were also included? Either way, I find it strange to have absolutely no change in the total score when results are coming in.

Those two war results were already included, those are over a month old?

You mentioned checking the last six weeks of results. I guess more accurately, you were including the last four weeks of results. So, I see what happened now.

viewtopic.php?f=438&t=174424&start=945

I posted the last six weeks as a short cut to those who wanted to check for accuracy, since the July 15th update didn't have that edited due to RL.
Both July 1st and July 15th updates were posted, so the point change is comparing to the July 15th update. Meaning, only point changes that occur the last two weeks are marked there.

icepack

IcePack wrote:Another question, does anyone care to see the weights? If it falls below 150 it automatically is removed off the list. Is this something most people are really curious to see or can i remove it from the updates?

Let me know,
Ice

I quite like seeing the weights on the chart. Please leave it there, unless it's a substantial additional amount of work to compile.

IcePack wrote:

Qwert wrote:

IcePack wrote:

Qwert wrote:

IcePack wrote:Does everyone like the current layout of the scores?

IE:

2 YR Score, then 1 year, then name, then rating?

I do that because the 2 YR SCore is the main score for most people, and wanted it highlighted on the left by boxing it in. but then the 1 yr score is between 2 year and the name. Just want to make sure people dont want 1 yr, 2 yr, then name.

Either way. just curious. Working on this again this morning and double checking all the numbers.

i wonder how will this look,if scores dont have this 1 year and 2 year, and go like in Player scoreboard, who will be in first place?

Im not sure i understand?

i say if scoreboard look like player scoreboard, where scores are not erase after two years of play.

You mean, include all results with no decay?

yes.

--------------------------------------------------------
are MYT-TLW not include in this update?

I would love to see the points impact of a result on the list of completed wars that are included in the updates.

Keefie wrote:I would love to see the points impact of a result on the list of completed wars that are included in the updates.

That might be tough to really record unless he input one at a time, then recorded the difference. It'd be neat to see but afraid it'd take too much of IP's time.

patrickaa317 wrote:

Keefie wrote:I would love to see the points impact of a result on the list of completed wars that are included in the updates.

That might be tough to really record unless he input one at a time, then recorded the difference. It'd be neat to see but afraid it'd take too much of IP's time.

Yeah, probably not going to happen. As patrickaa317 indicates, this would take very, very long to do. Not sure its something i can take on.

IcePack

IcePack wrote:Another question, does anyone care to see the weights? If it falls below 150 it automatically is removed off the list. Is this something most people are really curious to see or can i remove it from the updates?

Let me know,
Ice

Keep the weight on there

Agreed. Keep the weight on

Bruceswar wrote:

IcePack wrote:Another question, does anyone care to see the weights? If it falls below 150 it automatically is removed off the list. Is this something most people are really curious to see or can i remove it from the updates?

Let me know,
Ice

Keep the weight on there

Alrighty, sounds like the weights a desirable piece of info. I'll keep it

IcePack wrote:

patrickaa317 wrote:

Keefie wrote:I would love to see the points impact of a result on the list of completed wars that are included in the updates.

That might be tough to really record unless he input one at a time, then recorded the difference. It'd be neat to see but afraid it'd take too much of IP's time.

Yeah, probably not going to happen. As patrickaa317 indicates, this would take very, very long to do. Not sure its something i can take on.

IcePack

Would it be something similar to what FD did with
?

Do you know how he was able to extract those individual results?

I don't think so

I was thinking more along the lines of:

HH RS 25 16 06/23/13 25

The 25 being the + or - points each clan would receive.

Keefie wrote:I don't think so

I was thinking more along the lines of:

HH RS 25 16 06/23/13 25

The 25 being the + or - points each clan would receive.

+ for one isn't - for the other though?
It has to do with the relative ratings, plus the impact of weight?

IcePack,

a special thanks for you in name of Atlantis!
to give us a preview of the possible ranking so far.

We likey...

Genoke wrote:IcePack,

a special thanks for you in name of Atlantis!
to give us a preview of the possible ranking so far.

We likey...

Not a problem, you met the min 1 year weight so i included you on that list. You dont quite meet the 2 year weight requirement, so you won't jump onto the official list for a bit longer.

I must admit it's the use of 'weight' and it's use in calculating ratings that I understand least.

How does it affect the amount of points a clan would gain from winning a war. For instance, HH are about to secure a victory over Retribution, a clan ranked far higher than us. We have a pretty high weight of 996, would the amount of points gained be different if our weight was 500 or 300 etc Similarly would the effect be the same if we had lost ?

Cheers
K

IcePack wrote:

Genoke wrote:IcePack,

a special thanks for you in name of Atlantis!
to give us a preview of the possible ranking so far.

We likey...

Not a problem, you met the min 1 year weight so i included you on that list. You dont quite meet the 2 year weight requirement, so you won't jump onto the official list for a bit longer.

oh...i thought we had to finish 4 clan wars to jump into the official list....

Genoke wrote:

IcePack wrote:

Genoke wrote:IcePack,

a special thanks for you in name of Atlantis!
to give us a preview of the possible ranking so far.

We likey...

Not a problem, you met the min 1 year weight so i included you on that list. You dont quite meet the 2 year weight requirement, so you won't jump onto the official list for a bit longer.

oh...i thought we had to finish 4 clan wars to jump into the official list....

The official list that is widely considered the most accurate is the 2 year measure. I've included 1 year with a lower weight just for viewing purposes.
You need 3-4 wars to get onto the 2 Year F400 official list.

IcePack

i try to find IA-MM 10-6 ?

Qwert wrote:i try to find IA-MM 10-6 ?

When did it complete

Thanks mate for your a great effort

How many games RGX " The Royoal Galaxy " need to appear in the ranks?

We played only 1 game vs TNC

IcePack wrote:

Qwert wrote:i try to find IA-MM 10-6 ?

When did it complete

[2013-07-13 15:35:52]