|
MATHS POINT: The way this system works means that the fainal score is (raid wins in total) / (7*length in weeks). So Win Rate is inversely proportional to weeks done * wins, none of this maths is needed, as raid wins gives the effect as the rate. So keeping track of wins is all you need to do. |
|
galvinioJoin Date: 2011-06-30
Post Count: 222 |
Or you could just count the raids... |
|
|
Pretty effective system, actually. |
|
Theta0Join Date: 2011-02-09
Post Count: 40750 |
too complicated for war clans
or you can do
i have 50 wins you have 25 |
|
jake5999Join Date: 2009-11-18
Post Count: 62 |
Lol. Lilly Ma'am, I like it it's easier than what it used to be in the past. |
|
|
that concept of
"clan A - 100 raid wins, clan B - 20 raid wins, A wins final battle, A wins"
was never the actual concept
there has to be proportionality for the system to be effective
i've always found 70-30, 70 for raids, 30 for final battles, to be good
hence, if you lose raids and win the final battle, you only have 30%
but if you win tons of raids, but lose the final battle, you have 70% majority
it's a good equilibrium |
|
BGSBJoin Date: 2011-02-12
Post Count: 11942 |
Oh ok. |
|
Lilly_SForum ModeratorJoin Date: 2010-11-21
Post Count: 8363 |
Victorly, who even are you and where did you get that idea?
Where were you for the 1M tix ad campaign I did for VS that got us to 100k members?
Will you be around for the 1.5M tix ad campaign when Vertigo is out? |
|
|
|
Its not that complicated, its pretty much 3d grade math. |
|
|
@super, and I use algebra to prove its unnecessary. |
|
|
seems legit
/not
"It's kind of funny how your pigment determines how people perceive you,That's ignorant." |
|
|
generally speaking
due to the failures of past leaders, and the requirements as such of final battle teams, clans and HRs have grown into feeling the necessity to have such teams of their most well trained members. I know many feel this unnecessary when systems such as this come up and make final battles seem obsolete, but final battle teams should never be as such.
in having one, it gives low ranked members a group of people to look up to, and singles out those that truly perform (in most cases, disregard x-101sts team of vade's dancers and any final battle team with ron in it). furthermore, for such a team to perform to the best of their ability, they require extensive training, and as such gain remarkable skills in fighting - a perfect group of individuals to go out and train new, lower ranked members.
i don't disagree that this system is a step forward, but i think disregarding a final battle team entirely is a mistake. It is always best to have a final battle, but to not disregard raids in the final battle result, as they mean more.
done |
|
UtsuroidoJoin Date: 2008-09-26
Post Count: 18402 |
Lilly get VS already.
|
|
|
Vic, she doesn't. You're obviously a fool if you think she does. Anyway, this system is good. It creates an accurate way of knowing who actually did better. |
|
|
I thought she was talking about the leader change I haven't seen any information about that. |
|
|
Yeah. I can see the point of this system. |
|
|
actually in general, i should sum up my view:
disregarding final battles - a mistake.
this is sort of just overcomplicating what has already been done in past wars.
for example, RAT VS and UAF vs. FEAR.
We kept a weekly record of individual clan raid wins, and raid wins as a 3 clan team. Then, through talking to FEAR command, they decided their final battle team was not sufficient, so we did not have a final battle.
it's best to run things like thus:-
>record raid wins
>prepare final battle teams through raids
>when final battle comes, determine which side won more raids
>whichever side won more either gets a step up in the final battle, or, in the case of massive raid wins, declares they have won, but have a final battle anyway.
Final battle teams are good, as are final battles. |
|
|
It is a matter of opinion if something is necessary or not, and technically I didn't say it was necessary. |
|
|
actually
WAIT A MINUTE
HOLD THE PHONE.
no war VS has EVER been in has had "raid-nullifying final battles"
it has ALWAYS been arranged
even with VAK
that consideration and proportionality be held for both the final battle and who won more raids
always |
|
TimeWrathJoin Date: 2013-06-05
Post Count: 18 |
how about both groups go to war for a long time and the one that gives up loses |
|
|
I'll be honest, I like the idea, it's interesting, but it makes it seem less like a war and more like just a team deathmatch game. |
|
|
OR YOU CAN JUST ADD THE RAID WINS UP TO A TOTAL NUMBER
@op;
dumb idea |
|
Ryanr23Join Date: 2010-05-17
Post Count: 40374 |
[ Content Deleted ] |
|
|