TL/TV vs NWO Stats

[DeletedUser]

and add to that the 3 extra cities we took from them yesterday but i suppose its got to wait until the next update.

 

[DeletedUser]

Good luck to everyone involved. It is wars like this that are making me regret quitting.
Ah well, i have a nice 300 point city in ocean 15 to look after now.

 

[DeletedUser]

Spoiler: Weekly Stats (got rid of net change since it was confusing to many people)

7/17 - 7/23
TL-NWO
32-12

TV-NWO
30-2

7/24 - 7/30
TL-NWO
6-5

TV-NWO
1-2

7/31-8/6
TL-NWO
4-2

TV-NWO
18-6

8/7-8/16
TL-NWO
5-6

TV-NWO
1-2

Weeks Won:
TL-NWO
3-1

TV-NWO
2-2

 

[DeletedUser]

Cleaned. Again.

Please, if you wish to discuss these stats and how legitimate they are, please create a discussion thread.

 

[DeletedUser10902]

Its not worth complaining about. If a player ghosts, he just gives you free cities.

Stats... I don't care if they count or not. Not worth fighting over. If NWO needs to buff their stats with Ghost Towns, fine. I'll give them that handicap.

I can not believe two people negative rep me for this! lol

Seriously? And how much you want to bet they were from NWO? Just a guess there. (I know who the one was, because that player actually signed it. Thank you)

Everyone seemed to have glossed over the point I was trying to make... before I got a bit snarky. Sorry about that, by the way. My Point is, if a player ghosts while you are trying for his cities, its Christmas time! Those are freebies to you. I fail to see the point of complaining about it.

Because it looks bad in the stats? According to Z Grade:

From what I have seen, TL/TV care more about stats (excluding igapolis and maybe a few others) than NWO.

So, as I said. It not worth complaining over. And I said that I don't care if those cities count or not. Left it up to you guys. I think some people are just a tad bit touchy here...

Also, Z-Grade. Great job on the stats. You out did yourself when you listed all the players who lost cities and to who. It was interesting to take a look at.

 

[DeletedUser]

Although raw numbers give a good idea of how the war is going, I prefer to see figures summarizing the stats. Here, I offer a plot of cumulative conquests per week. First day of the war was set to 17/07/2011 as that was the day in which first conquests occurred.

The plot clearly shows everything that has been previously discussed in this forum. During the first week, at the start of the war, both TL and TV pounded NWO with 34 and 31 conquests while losing only 12 and 1, respectively. However, after that, both sides have been basically exchanging cities as can be inferred by the very similar trends of conquest. The slope of these lines shows that TL and TV are respectively taking 4.8 and 7.7 NWO cities per week. NWO, on the other hand is giving a good fight by making 5.4 take overs per week to TL. If any, NWO is lagging in the war against TV with clear lower rates of conquest per week. Of course, it is too early to make a safe assumption of what side is winning.

I intend to update this every now and then.

Raulm


NWO vs TL:

Spoiler

​

NWO vs TV:

Spoiler

​

 

[DeletedUser]

Although raw numbers give a good idea of how the war is going, I prefer to see figures summarizing the stats. Here, I offer a plot of cumulative conquests per week. First day of the war was set to 17/07/2011 as that was the day in which first conquests occurred.

The plot clearly shows everything that has been previously discussed in this forum. During the first week, at the start of the war, both TL and TV pounded NWO with 34 and 31 conquests while losing only 12 and 1, respectively. However, after that, both sides have been basically exchanging cities as can be inferred by the very similar trends of conquest. The slope of these lines shows that TL and TV are respectively taking 4.8 and 7.7 NWO cities per week. NWO, on the other hand is giving a good fight by making 5.4 take overs per week to TL. If any, NWO is lagging in the war against TV with clear lower rates of conquest per week. Of course, it is too early to make a safe assumption of what side is winning.

I intend to update this every now and then.

Raulm

Spoiler

​

I like the bar graph.

 

[DeletedUser]

Although raw numbers give a good idea of how the war is going, I prefer to see figures summarizing the stats. Here, I offer a plot of cumulative conquests per week. First day of the war was set to 17/07/2011 as that was the day in which first conquests occurred.

The plot clearly shows everything that has been previously discussed in this forum. During the first week, at the start of the war, both TL and TV pounded NWO with 34 and 31 conquests while losing only 12 and 1, respectively. However, after that, both sides have been basically exchanging cities as can be inferred by the very similar trends of conquest. The slope of these lines shows that TL and TV are respectively taking 4.8 and 7.7 NWO cities per week. NWO, on the other hand is giving a good fight by making 5.4 take overs per week to TL. If any, NWO is lagging in the war against TV with clear lower rates of conquest per week. Of course, it is too early to make a safe assumption of what side is winning.

I intend to update this every now and then.

Raulm

Spoiler

​

sorry to spam this stat thread..

its because this is a cool way of showing data..i like this graph things

+rep for you

 

[DeletedUser]

Although raw numbers give a good idea of how the war is going, I prefer to see figures summarizing the stats. Here, I offer a plot of cumulative conquests per week. First day of the war was set to 17/07/2011 as that was the day in which first conquests occurred.

The plot clearly shows everything that has been previously discussed in this forum. During the first week, at the start of the war, both TL and TV pounded NWO with 34 and 31 conquests while losing only 12 and 1, respectively. However, after that, both sides have been basically exchanging cities as can be inferred by the very similar trends of conquest. The slope of these lines shows that TL and TV are respectively taking 4.8 and 7.7 NWO cities per week. NWO, on the other hand is giving a good fight by making 5.4 take overs per week to TL. If any, NWO is lagging in the war against TV with clear lower rates of conquest per week. Of course, it is too early to make a safe assumption of what side is winning.

I intend to update this every now and then.

Raulm

Spoiler

​

What program did you use to make this?

 

[DeletedUser]

Spoiler: weekly stats

7/17 - 7/23
tl-nwo
32-12

tv-nwo
30-2

7/24 - 7/30
tl-nwo
6-5

tv-nwo
1-2

7/31-8/6
tl-nwo
4-2

tv-nwo
18-6

8/7-8/13
tl-nwo
5-5

tv-nwo
1-2

8/14-8/20
tl-nwo
2-13

tv-nwo
1-1

 

[DeletedUser]

Total:

TL/V = 100
NWO = 50

To put it in perspective.......

P.S. We kicked out our in-actives (thus the drop in points) so you probably won't be able to take many cities anymore. I will give you credit for Rylet, all his cities are on the frontline so he is getting pounded.

 

[DeletedUser]

What program did you use to make this?

Pretty simple. Data was collected from Grepostats. I used a combination of Excel to group the data and SigmaPlot to make the plot and regression analysis

 

[DeletedUser]

Total:

TL/V = 100
NWO = 50

To put it in perspective.......

P.S. We kicked out our in-actives (thus the drop in points) so you probably won't be able to take many cities anymore. I will give you credit for Rylet, all his cities are on the frontline so he is getting pounded.
__________________
Looking to lose your cities so your "leaders" can grow? Join NWO (it rhymes)

It's no way to discuss against hard figures TL/V = 100; NWO = 50. We can read that in the whole war we have lost twice as many cities as we have gained. My point with the statistical analysis of the data is to show the current trend without considering if the conquests were to actives of inactives. You can see, lmark lost way too many towns without raising the alarm. We never said anything about his activity status.

Btw, it was about time to let your inactives go. They were actually inflating TL points and their rank in Theta. I'd say that number four is more like the real figure. Hope we never again have to put this issue of activity vs inactivity on the discussion table. Actually, I thought this issue was already sorted.

Btw, I'm not leader in NWO and I'm growing like crazy, so many of my friends

 

[DeletedUser]

It's no way to discuss against hard figures TL/V = 100; NWO = 50. We can read that in the whole war we have lost twice as many cities as we have gained. My point with the statistical analysis of the data is to show the current trend without considering if the conquests were to actives of inactives.

Twist the stats around anyway you'd like, show them on graphs charting weekly changes in whatever makes you feel good. Point is, we are beating you 2 - 1. I'd also like to point out that our gains are IN ADDITION to cities we are taking from JFL, a war that was already in progress when you decided to jump in. We are fighting a 3 front war while you only have one enemy. Put that on a graph.....

During that same time frame:

TL = 32
JFL = 7

 

[DeletedUser]

Twist the stats around anyway you'd like, show them on graphs charting weekly changes in whatever makes you feel good. Point is, we are beating you 2 - 1. I'd also like to point out that our gains are IN ADDITION to cities we are taking from JFL, a war that was already in progress when you decided to jump in. We are fighting a 3 front war while you only have one enemy. Put that on a graph.....

During that same time frame:

TL = 32
JFL = 7

Just a little, very tiny, correction... Unless TL and TV are actually an academy of each other, NWO is actually fighting 2 fronts. Maybe i missed something but I thought that both alliances were grown up alliances, otherwise you may notify Kas1 so he makes the corresponding change.

Theta: Alliance Fact-File

Just to avoid any confusion, I split the plots in two

NWO vs TL:

Spoiler

​

NWO vs TV:

Spoiler

​

 

[DeletedUser]

If anybody is bored, perhaps create a breakdown of the number of players per alliance that are actually taking/losing cities - it will be a good indicator of the proportion of an alliance that are actively involved in fighting.

 

[DeletedUser]

If anybody is bored, perhaps create a breakdown of the number of players per alliance that are actually taking/losing cities - it will be a good indicator of the proportion of an alliance that are actively involved in fighting.

Z Grade already did that and posted with his stats update

 

[DeletedUser]

Should we also add Standings in the alliance rankings pre-war to current? TL started out in the number 2 spot... We were 4th? or 3rd?

 

[DeletedUser15302]

P.S. We kicked out our in-actives (thus the drop in points)

Oh yes the Liq family alliances have been losing AND kicking members out of the alliance at the speed of lightening in the past few days.
and the thing is,most of those players used to be very active but 'for some reason they quitted the game all of a sudden'.
and it's obvious you don't count these kind of statistics in your so called statistics.

 

[DeletedUser12404]

Just a little, very tiny, correction... Unless TL and TV are actually an academy of each other, NWO is actually fighting 2 fronts. Maybe i missed something but I thought that both alliances were grown up alliances, otherwise you may notify Kas1 so he makes the corresponding change.

i would publicly commend you on the graph.
TV is officially the academy of TL and it does say so in KAS1's fact file.
secondly, i think front's are different from alliances. even if TL and TV weren't allied, you would still only have 1 front. TL is fighting on 3 fronts with NWO on the north-west, JFL on the north east (or just east) and TP in the south. fronts are regions, not alliances. TV&TL is on the same front for you guys.