Top 12 Alliances Sink-or-Swim

  • Thread starter Greygnarl The Destroyer
  • Start date


9/16 Update

Each time, it seems that I present this differently. A way to change things up, maybe. Or just trying to find something that works well to give the present situation. Today, I'll rank the alliances in each of the four categories. The ranking will be slightly different than the grepo rankings because I combine alliances.

Total PointsNet Points% change
1. Atomic15,705,68713,7820.09%
2. DES13,972,901243,5931.77%
3. SPARTAN12,574,185145,3811.17%
4. ANON Thieves10,448,994272,3902.68%
5. AFC10,277,365247,5782.47%
6. DLI8,783,711115,2351.33%
7. VoR8,196,183353,4964.51%
8. Arcadians6,094,1896,4150.11%
9. League of Destruction2,953,50680,5032.80%
10. Ascension2,439,14013,9510.58%

Total ABPNet ABP% change
1. Atomic5,982,798232,9584.05%
2. ANON Thieves4,424,92999,6422.30%
3. DES3,922,135106,6092.79%
4. DLI3,650,95277,5782.17%
5. SPARTAN3,354,656112,9653.48%
6. AFC2,787,712175,4246.72%
7. Arcadians1,853,62022,3001.22%
8. VoR1,815,95675,5884.34%
9. League of Destruction1,439,20423,6561.67%

DBPNet DBP% change DBP
1. DES4,203,978128,3083.15%
2. Atomic4,008,974173,9504.54%
3. AFC3,985,055313,4018.54%
4. DLI3,248,04282,4802.61%
5. ANON Thieves3,212,44469,5302.21%
6. VoR2,237,647104,8634.92%
7. SPARTAN1,629,17594,4256.15%
8. League of Destruction1,607,70348,8463.13%
9. Arcadians1,013,43488,3729.55%
10. Ascension516,79215,1033.01%

Total CitiesNet gained% gained
1. Atomic1,574-4-0.25%
2. DES1,441201.41%
3. SPARTAN1,248110.89%
4. AFC1,096171.58%
5. ANON Thieves1,069212.00%
6. DLI915121.33%
7. VoR898435.03%
8. Arcadians617-3-0.48%
9. League of Destruction33082.48%
10. Ascension23231.31%

A couple of notes:
  • The week that I remove GOA from the top alliances, they lost a lot of cities to top alliances. Sorry, but no recognition for them this week.
  • I find it interesting that the these alliances have more DBP than ABP: AFC, DES, VoR, League of Destruction, Ascension. Well, I guess that's half the alliances. The other half has more ABP than DBP. I'm not sure if this goes to show different alliance strategies, or just history. (For example, if you start around weak alliances, you'll run over them and rack up ABP and not have to defend as much. On the other hand, VoR has been on the defensive throughout most of its history.)
  • AFC almost gained more DBP this week (313,401) than Ascension has over its history (516,792). Atomic's ABP (232,958 this week, and Ascension has 477,826 in its history) is not quite as impressive, but still remarkable.
  • A good part of VoR's growth this week was picking up three new players. And they actually did pretty well on the conquest front, taking three cities and only losing one.
  • Alliances that lost no cities to the enemy: AFC (8-0), League of Destruction (2-0), Ascension (2-0)
  • Alliances that took no cities from the enemy: Arcadians (0-6)
  • For the third straight week, Ascension has taken enemy cities (2 this week) and lost none.

Probably the biggest thing that stands out to me is ANON Thieves taking 10 enemy cities and losing just one, and Atomic doing the opposite, taking just one enemy city and losing 11. This is three weeks in a row that ANON Thieves have done well, and unlike the last two weeks where they jumped on an inactive, they took cities from several players this week.

Atomic, on the other hand, continue to stagnate. They barely grew overall (0.09% growth doesn't really count as growing), and had a net loss of 4 cities. A big part of this is their loss of 11 cities to the enemy, and they were only able to come up with one in return.

Arcadians really took a beating this week. They had the highest DBP growth rate (although only a middling net DBP), and it came at the cost of 6 cities lost to the enemy (mostly DES, but Atomic also took one).

If I adjust my stats to look at ABP or DBP per capita, Ascension would be really impressive. For a six-member alliance, they're doing well for themselves.


As always Artientus, a great analysis. Sorry for not responding earlier; I was having my nose bloodied.


Alliance conquests of other top alliances, if you're curious:

Atomic gained 1, lost 11
ANON Thieves gained 10 and lost 1
AFC gained 8 and lost 0
SPARTAN gained 1 and lost 4 (one was to a non-top alliance, but I count all losses; top alliances only count for conquests)
DES won 5 and lost 5
VoR won 3 and lost 1
DLI won 1 and lost 6
Arcadians won 0 and lost 6
League of Destruction won 2 and lost 0
Ascension won 2 and lost 0

I have been informed that one of the LoD gains was actually a city exchange with Atomic, so it doesn't count. LoD won 1 and lost 0, and Atomic won 1 and lost 10. (The other half of the exchange hadn't been completed when I looked at the conquests, so I'll just not count it next week.)


Net ABP% ABPNet DBP%DBPNet Points%PointsNet Cities%CitiesConq gainedConq lostNet Conq
2ANON Thieves178,5194.13%307,4319.78%493,4724.85%151.43%734
7Dark Lords134,9643.78%254,9348.05%238,4132.75%131.44%34-1
9League Destruction48,1353.40%123,7897.94%192,2076.69%175.28%422

Some notes:
  • AFC's DBP gained this past week is almost as much as the next two biggest gains put together. This is the biggest thing that jumps out at me.
  • DES had a net conquest of 0, but this does not mean it is managing to hold on to status quo. It is losing cities to ANON Thieves, and managing to take cities from Arcadians to replace them.
  • Arcadians and VoR did not take a city this past week. Arcadians points are dropping, and VoR is managing to stay positive by taking in a new player and, I guess taking small ghosts and unaligned players, and founding new cities.
  • Ascension has yet to lose a city to the enemy since I started doing this again.
  • I don't think this includes any of the double BP days from grepo's birthday celebration, even though almost all of these alliances are getting more BP than they've been getting the past few weeks. I'm curious if next week's BP gains will be greater than this week's.
  • Even so, this week's BP totals are greater than any other week's, with three exceptions. (DES, Arcadians and VoR got greater ABP on the week of 9/2, but other than that, this week's ABP and DBP gains are greater for all alliances than any other week in the past four weeks. Either this has been an incredibly active week, or there's something wrong with my data.)

The last three weeks, I think ANON Thieves have been the most impressive, with their cleaning out of their ocean. This week, though, AFC's 9 cities taken to one lost (and that amazing DBP) probably puts them into the forefront of last week's action.

Arcadians continue to suffer, and VoR is taking a beating. SPARTAN and Ascension (again) didn't give up any cities.

It looks like Atomic might be recovering. They lead the alliances in ABP gained (but then, they've done that every week but one), and, more importantly, they've taken a couple enemy cities. There's still a lot of work for them to do before I'm comfortable saying that they're back, but these are good signs for them.


Now that I've been doing this for four weeks, I thought I'd make a little chart of BP over time. It's kind of interesting to see.

You can see there's a gap between the top 7 alliances and the bottom 3 in ABP, and how Atomic is consistently at the top of ABP.

With DBP, you can see how AFC is towards the top (especially in the last two weeks) and how last week was kind of a down week for just about everybody but AFC and Atomic.

9-23 ABP chart.png

9-23 DBP chart.png
Last edited by a moderator:


Great post as always. Looks like I need to start attacking more :(


ye, keep it going ART, the weekly update is especially interesting ;)


Going through my data this week, I found that I did make a mistake last week. I subtracted the wrong column for DBP gained--I was subtracting that week's DBP from the previous week's ABP. That's why AFC's gain was ridiculously high.


9/23 - 9/30

Net ABP% ABPNet DBP%DBPNet Points%PointsNet Cities%Cities
Lords of Thieves367,2985.71%214,8924.85%-147,945-0.76%-29-1.44%
League Destruction75,7125.09%65,6623.90%125,9924.11%82.31%

  • AFC and Atomic traded players, so the will probably be taking several cities from each over over the next week or two as things settle down. We see the start of that this week, as Atomic took 4 cities from AFC, who took 3 cities from Atomic.
  • Two weeks after Illuminati and Lords of Darkness merged, they again merged with ANON Thieves, creating a huge power in the east.
  • Despite merging 3 alliances into 2, the new Lords of Thieves coalition dropped in total points, probably as a result of leaving inactives or marginally active players out of the merger. Or possibly players on VM who have not returned to join yet.
  • Similarly, AFC saw its first drop in points and cities as it lost a big player. Atomic hadn't picked him up at the time of the data collection, so they're not showing the increase from him joining. That will show up next week.
  • Ascension lost its first city to the enemy, and failed to gain one.
  • VoR and Arcadians continue to suffer. VoR, despite gaining a few cities from SPARTAN, ended up 8 cities in the hole. Arcadians didn't manage to take any enemy cities and lost 4.
  • DES wasn't able to make up its losses to Lord Thieves and League of Destruction with cities taken from Arcadians, and finished the week 2 cities in the hole.
  • Lord of Thieves were the only alliance not to lose any cities to the enemy.

I was curious as to whether or not the three days of double BP made a difference. (All days fell in this week, I think, and not the previous week. Note the corrected DBP gain from last week below.)

9/16 ABP9/23 ABPIncrease from previous week9/16 DBP9/23 DBPIncrease from previous week
Lords of Thieves299,690367,29822.56%381,383214,892-43.65%
League Destruction48,13575,71257.29%74,94365,662-12.38%

Almost all alliances gained more ABP and DBP this week than last week. The double BP days were just 3 out of the 7, so one might expect just about a 43% gain, on average, if all else remains equal. And, indeed, the ABP increased by 44.34% and the DBP increased by 38.41%. But there's a remarkable variety in the increases. AFC and Ascension more than doubled their ABP, and DES and Atomic more than doubled their DBP. On the other hand, VoR didn't take advantage of this, earning significantly less ABP than the previous week, as did Lord of Thieves and League of Destruction with DBP. I don't know about other alliances, but in AFC, we made a concerted effort to take advantage of it, using Heightened senses with the double BP to quadruple BP, and it shows in the stats here.


Martin and blizzack having a beer together reviewing the stats.


Sorry, I picked up another class recently that shifted my schedule, and I haven't yet settled in to an adjusted schedule.


10/7 through 10/14 stats, presented without comment

Net ABP% ABPNet DBP%DBPNet Points%PointsNet Cities%Cities
Lords of Thieves7,054,863103.80%139,7853.01%745,9323.84%713.58%
League Destruction63,8714.09%62,1483.55%457,63114.34%298.17%

I did record the stats last week, but I never got around to analysis, so I'm presenting these raw numbers without comment. (Well, other note than this was about the time that C0re was founded, which might explain DES losing points.)

Edit: This is actually 9/30 through 10/7. My apologies. I didn't realize I had skipped two weeks.
Last edited by a moderator:


10/7 through 10/23

10/7 Through 10/23
Net ABP% ABPNet DBP%DBPNet Points%PointsNet Cities%Cities+Conq-Conq=Conq+Players-Players
Lords of Thieves637,9969.04%339,0417.08%1,010,8535.01%633.07%74302
League Destruction199,57012.27%60,6583.35%2,223,24360.93%25867.19%52310

Some notes about the data:
  • The information about C0re is not included in the totals or averages for this analysis; I am including it to have as a baseline for next time. Since that alliance has some players from former top alliances, I will be including it for future analyses. (This table was just copied and pasted from my spreadsheet. I didn't take the time to erase blank rows, or the C0re row.)
  • This data covers a bit over 2 weeks. (I would have gone to the 21st, but that data was missing from grepostats, so I just extended it to the 23rd. I'll be doing week-long analyses starting ending on Thursdays now.)
  • As mentioned before, grepostats was missing two days of data, so I do not have any conquests or player movement that happened on those days.
  • The number of conquests gained does not match the conquests lost because one alliance lost a city to C0re, which I did not count as a top alliance this week.
  • Atomic's negative ABP (and much of their point decrease) is the result of Atomical disbanding, and losing all the ABP there. Atomic is now a one-alliance alliance, and not a coalition like DES, SPARTAN or Thieves.
  • Apparently, I can use color in my tables, so you might see some color in future tables to highlight certain things.

Some analysis:
  • Arcadians and LoD show big changes because a lot of players from Arcadians migrated to LoD.
  • Other than LoD, three other alliances had huge gains in ABP: DES, SPARTAN and AFC. Not coincidentally, those were the three alliances who took or are in the process of taking an Artemisia supercity.
  • Congratulations to DES for being the first to take a supercity. They beat AFC by a bit over 4 hours, which is almost like a photo-finish in an event that lasted more than 2 weeks.
  • Ascension (again) did not lose any conquests. They were the only alliance not to lose any conquests over the week (or 9 days).
  • SPARTAN gained a lot of cities over these 16 days, but not a lot of points. This may be either a result of taking some new low-point members in their academy, or founding a lot of cities.
  • Thieves had a larger percent gain in points than cities, which is probably the result of the fact that they conquered more cities than any other alliance last week, gaining some nice cities in the process.
  • It may be time to start to get worried about Atomic. They lost 10 cities over the past 10 days, and posted a net conquest of -8, the worst of all top alliances. If they can't right their ship, they're going to start hurting. They can't rest on their laurels of everything they've done in the past. They're not aggressive like they had been. They didn't go for one of Artemisia's cities, or even take advantage of AFC when they were short attacking forces from hitting Artemisia. This is not the same Atomic alliance of old. I don't know if C0re is an attempt at reviving their old attacking philosophy.
  • Even discounting the loss of BP from the loss of Atomical, Atomic only gained 412,966, a 6.66% increase. It's less than Thieves, but a larger net gain than any alliance not going for Artemisia. (On the other hand, outside of Thieves, all the other top tier of alliances went for Artemisia, so this is like saying they're doing better than the bottom tier, which is not really saying much.) Their net DBP gain was 55,107 (12.79%); their net point gain was 100,843 (0.70%); their net city gain was 21 (1.41%). Other than the increased DBP (probably from Thieves starting to hit them in the east, increasing their DBP), these numbers are comparable to the lower tier of top alliances, and not the upper tier.
  • I'd like to see what LoD does in the future. The numbers right now are kind of messy because everything's obscured by players shifting from Arcadians to LoD. There's reason to believe that they might be worthy of the top tier of alliances. (They had a net conquest of +3, the same as Thieves and AFC, at least.)

My apologies again for taking so long. Future posts will probably happen at some point over weekends because the data will be from Thursday to Thursday.


Oh, and also the order that the alliances are listed reflects an old ranking. I'm just too lazy to adjust the order to reflect a more current ranking.


Great job again.

Yes, CoReO is worth watching. Some elite moving into this alliance but leaving some disgruntled members behind or some thinking that they are worthy but not invited. It is going to be interesting.


10/23 through 10/31

10/23 Through 10/31
Net ABP% ABPNet DBP%DBPNet Points%PointsNet Cities%Cities+Conq-Conq=Conq+Players-Players
1Lords of Thieves281,7153.66%148,6162.90%253,1501.19%331.56%651
9League of Destruction116,2956.37%103,4545.53%-297,925-5.07%-41-6.69%220

I'm going to present this without much commentary because the amount of shifting from one alliance to another (and disbanding the DES academy) obscures too much. All the grey-shaded alliances have had significant number of members transfer into or out of the alliance.

The only thing that is relevant is the conquest tally (and I went back to include any conquests of or by the DES academy before they were disbanded). I highlighted the alliances with a net loss of conquests. This past week (well, I think it was actually 8 days with another day where data were not reported), SPARTAN, Arcadians and Ascension all did not lose any cities. (The cities taken and cities lost are not equal because Mobios took a city, and I didn't include them in the top alliances this week.)

There's still a lot of shifting going on this week, so it might be another week before the stats settle down some.


I heard that a few of the fatter players got upset over the lack of cookies in the game, so they created a new alliance in homage of the American favorite: oreo.

In recent news:
Sparta changes name to sMapl3 after the Canadian Syrup.
A Foolish Conspiracy is apparently changing their name to fApple.
Mobius is now changing their names to mBop. This is mainly due to the strange enthralling love they have to the old pop band Hanson.

When speaking to Vor, the only word they could think of that starts with V deemed to be too inappropriate for this server, and they kept giggling when they said it. Because of that I'm starting a petition to get signatures to change their name to Vegan Bacon - made with real beef gravy.
Last edited by a moderator:


Oreo yum, I wonder if they will let me join. I bet the "C" represents the new Oreo with the chocolate filling. yum. LoT have thoughts of switching our name to "Drakes Coffee Cakes". Gotta love the Drake.