Good ideas for for how such a chart should work...Go!
Printable View
Good ideas for for how such a chart should work...Go!
There is already a combined chart. It's called Land.
Land*5+NW*3+Honor*2+(10-(total war wins*2))
Lowest score wins. Remove the WW chart :)
BB current score: (5*2)+(1*3)+(33*2)+(10-6)= 83
Shinra current score: (10*5)+(9*3)+(3*2)+(10-10)=83
These are the top 2 kingdoms based on the formula I proposed.
I think all war wins should be changed to give a flat 5k land and 5k honor. The combined chart winner is crowned champion of the server. This way there is no debate over what a win is. The following age name is picked by the winner but must be approved by bishop. You essentially cannot win without being top 10 land/nw. But if you can get into top ten land/nw with top 5 honor and decent number war wins you have good shot. Two reasonable methods to go after the same thing.
My suggestion:
(100-HonorRank)*(1+(War Points/100))+(120/LandRank)+(100/NWRank)
Yes?
Easy
(Land / 1000) + (NW / 200,000) + (Honor / 500) + (War Wins * 12.5) = SUPER MEGA DEATH CHART
Beastblood = 205.08 Land + 241.599 NW + 124.17 Honor + 48.25 WW = 619.099
Cromulent Republic = 213.523 Land + 174.517 NW + 124.574 Honor + 0 WW(it's not on the top 100 charts, so this is probably higher) = 512.614 (+ their actual ww score which would add around 25 if it's 2.0)
wsk = 39.49 Land + 33.096 NW + 196.38 Honor + 256.25 WW = 525.216
All Nightmare Long = 48.037 Land + 41.471 NW + 135.274 Honor + 96 WW = 320.782
Just a few examples -- took top Land KD, top NW KD, top Honor which was also top WW KD, and took our humble selves.
One to rule them all!
Charts. I know what I think so I don't really need charts. I do however appreciate the efforts by those who crown.
For the war tier, don't be discouraged. This is bait lol.
I wanted this for as long as i can remember because it shows strength in all categories of this game.
The true winner is the one that achieve highest combined score, no doubt. It shows skills in all categories of the game and there is no way a KD on 0 wars can just whore all age and think they can get away like age champs. It also brings more wars and diversity to the game overall. People that refused to grow needs to learn how to grow and adapt, those that refuse to war more and get some honor gets forced into warring more and overall we should see less cease fires and the charts should become more fierce, competitive and closer in all ways. The true champs should be the KD that manage to get highest combined score. Imo this is by far also the funniest way to play this game and always been. My 5 cents!
I approve this msg!Quote:
Originally Posted by Anri
It would be fun to see, unsure if it can be implemented without dividing the community though. Some people would argue the point value system assigned to land,nw,ww and honour etc
Yea, the community is definitely united in their opinions about the charts already. I'd hate to divide the community with one sensible way of measuring a kds abilities lolQuote:
Originally Posted by DM_Benjamin
Well I don't have any particular preferences or bias towards one chart or the next... let my suggestion for how they are calculated me the determining factor! ^_^Quote:
Originally Posted by DM_Benjamin
Maybe there was a tiny tiny bias against land...but that was more so the math would work out more easily. :D
Are you just using the war points thing as a tie breaker (amounts to almost no points in your scale)Quote:
Originally Posted by Palem
In your system they score:
BB:
(100-33)*(1+(3.36/100)+(120/2)+(100/1)
BB score 12322
Shinra scores:
(100-3)*(1+(14/100)+(120/10)+(90/10)
2134.xx (didn't bother calculating war win part)
I think making the war win score just a tie breaker is a good idea. I think your scale currently puts too much emphasis on land/nw as basically if you aren't in first for either land or nw you are eliminated.
I think the best bet is to look at the kingdoms who had strong ages over the last few ages and see what method of weighting reflects kingdoms who had good ages most accurately. At least that is what I tried to do with with my combined chart. I still think it under favours land/nw but that's the way the game is going kinda...
I'm only downplaying my interest because I think this system gives credence clearwater revival to my virtual kingdom.
You aren't calcing those correctly
BB = 229.2512
Shinra = 132.58
After calcing I agree it's not quite balanced
Here are some thoughts and considerations I tried to use:
-NW/Land is a double whammy. It's really not possible to be high on the Land charts, and low on the NW charts. The same isn't necessarily true for Honor and War Wins though.
-With Land/Honor/NW, it doesn't matter "how" you finish, as long as you're #1 (or whatever, you get my point). Same isn't quite true with the war points thing. You could finish 5th, but only have 1 less point than #1, and it seems weird to say you were 5x worse than #1 was.
-I wanted to use War Wins and Honor together, since they're tied together pretty closely. I couldn't think of a clever way of doing this with Land and NW.
But....but....what about my calculations?Quote:
Originally Posted by Palem
On my system
Shinra = 541.196
BB = 619.099
CR = 512.614 (plus their WW score which isn't on the charts)
wsk = 525.216
Its irrelevant. Theres a reason for having different charts to meassure your strenght in. Im not sure WW is working as intended. But theres quite a bit of difference between doing WW and going for landcrown. Honestly, im fairly sure alot of players in "lower rank WW KD" are better at the game, the core mechanics and understanding of them, than some of the "top KD provinces". It would strike me as odd, for people really into the whole ordeal of theorycrafting and discussion thereof to be content running a top KD province.
I simply refuse to believe that the buttom tier players in top tier KDs, are better than top tier players in lower tier KDs. In wich case it makes it impossible to make an accurate chart of whom is the best, because, differnt goals are different. Im nowhere near top tier, by god no, but the way the game is designed, it doesnt award more players in your KD, theres no war to force a war, theres no real way to force a defeat--- and all that leads to ****ed up WW charts. Land is easy to meassure, as is NW. WWs isnt - Im not sure we will ever get a nice WW chart, but making it into an overall chart to beat all charts? That just seems silly. As i said, different goals are different, and those different goals require differnt types of players.
goal: Be the best, most well-rounded kd in utopia, with success in every measurable statistic.
What's silly about that?
Who cares whoms is the jackest of all trades? Noone cares. Ultimately, the way the game is designed, theres some strats the work best for land, honor, NW and WW. I wont discuss the measuring of those, but ultimately. Unless you want a streamlined game, theres no need for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Palem
If you want to have a chart, that is THE chart to go for, sure, thats fine. But unless drastic changes are made to the game, it wont happen. So anything besides that is just another chart that doesnt mean anything, simply because its a faction of already used charts. Its a useless Epeen boost that imo, isnt really needed. theres plenty of charts to go for, having a Jack of all trades chart, doesnt make sense.
You not caring doesn't equate to no one caring.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ekusas
Most of the game doesn't give a **** about the land chart, that however does not make it useless.
I personally love the idea. :) I think many others in Utopia would like to see that chart.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ekusas
War Win chart, or any chart for that matter, requires navigation. I'm not sure why navigation is a frowned upon skill(?). I understand it circumvents some activity and mechanical skills, but it's a path to success nonetheless.
I'm personally only motivated by even to uphill challenges. I find no pleasure hitting down. I see yet more complexity than charting as a goal. I'm not that good but I enjoy province duels, finding and engaging province aces in the chaos of war. You find a way to do your job first, but it's great when the opportunity presents itself. I've had 2 really good duels and one that wasn't bad out of 5 wars total.
Okay, as a reply to both of you.
I know me having an opinnion doesnt equal everyone having mine, i think thats fairly easy for everone to understand when having an arguement. Thats why i also followed it up with arguments why i think of it as i do. None of you seems to have adressed that. So ill try again.
What is the point in having a "jackest of all trades" other than Epeen'in in a chart, that ultimating isnt worth measuring in, because it would require people/KDs to again invent a totally new way of playing, and ultimately lead to it not really doing what you want it to do, measure whom is actually the best at utopia.
I might come across as unclear, or otherwise retarded... That isnt my intent, but the thing is, as long as the game is made and work the way it does, theres no real way to create a "BEST UTOPIAN KD" chart, because different goals require different players/stragies.
If theres was only one chart, say, your chart... Sure, it might actually work. But as long as there is a Landcrown or a WW crown, different from the "BEST UN UTOPIA" crown, and those tracticts to achieve those crowns differ from the "bEST IN UTOPIA" crown it doesnt make sense to make one. You can make all the dang equations to calculate it as you want, but unless its actually THE best way to decern whoms the best, it wont matter, HENCE why i think its a useless endavour.
I don't really see how a formula could prove what kd or province is best at everything.
There will always be bias from one attribute to the next. It's kinda silly to even try to create parity. Top 10 KD wars are unlike anything I've ever experienced when I was ghettoing it up. However to go into a war without prep (unless the prep is just bad) is something top kd's haven't done in a long long time (or being waved unexpectedly).
It really is just two different worlds altogether.
People are free to chase whatever chart they so choose. I see no harm in giving players another chart that they may want to strive for. People figuring out new strategies is healthy for a strategy game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ekusas
The title is an exaggeration. There were combined charts in the past and they didn't "answer" who the best kds were, but they were a fun thing for kds that aren't really chasing any charts hardcore could try and jump the top of while having fun in every way the game will allow you to.
Palem, i totally get that, More charts = More funz. More competition = More rawr. I get that, thats not what im disagreeing with, or questioning, or whatever you may think im doing.
I dont mind having tons of charts. But having a "Best utopian KD chart" - Thats what im going at, and sure, you say that your title is a bit off the intended mark. Cool, but it didnt sound like that initially, hence why i kinda put my foot down. Also, i dont think anyone needs to be able to get to the top of charts. I think its healthy for a game, to prohbit casuals the taste of glory. Time = Reward, aswell as Skill = reward, if you think this tread is about finding a new chart that mirrors that in some way, great! But the way i read it, it didnt seem like it would end up with that and i dont see how, without quite heavy changes to the game, that it could.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ekusas
LOLLLLSAGATGWHGA ...
*pause*
ROLFFLFLFLFLLLFLLLL .....
*moar pauses*
LMAO!!!!!
.... ummm ... lol what a nub =)
let drop the war range restriction ... prove your "warly" tactics ... vs brute strength ... =)
.mcf
Is this a troll?Quote:
Originally Posted by Palem
looks like it to me ^_^Quote:
Originally Posted by DM_Benjamin
i dont think something should be based on war wins, but rather on war rankings based on the war points structure given by the devs.
if someone could give me a formula that includes war rankings (and not war wins), I would gladly take some time to compile the past 4 ages of data and come up with a 'combined' chart.
anyway, such a chart doesnt prove much. trust me, the mechanics and level of gameplay up top is just drastically different from the rest of the server. Unless you have played up in the top, you wont understand this and would still think warring tier gameplay is very similar to whoring tier gameplay. I think I deserve some credibility when saying this, for Pyromaniacs was once the top of the warring tier kingdoms. We demolished our competition, but when we entered the top.. it's a real big surprise :P like SURPRISEEEEE!
you dont know what you dont know, till you experience it.
When the tops play down here it doesn't necessarily shine through is what I think is unsaid. It's not an offense to the players, but I compliment to top organization.
@ Darkz. I think it's fair to ask tops to come down here.
This is why nw and land gives more points on a scale in a combined chart...Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOne
Normaly the KD that was #1 for land and nw also won the combined chart because the scale was created such. Its harder to win land and nw, a lot harder like you say and experienced yourself so its only right if its valued higher. No one oppose this from my understanding and KDs would struggle greatly if they attempted to bypass these KDs on the chart but would not be impossible. I think equlibrium, rage and some others won combined charts around those eras, because they might have got more wars/honor compared to the ones that won land and nw without any wars. It was straight up fairness and one of the reasons i really loved the chart. A kd could win all charts without going thru at least one or two wars to obtain ww/honor but it was hard for them.
I am still awaiting some answer from the ones that ran AR back in the days and how this formula was made.
I'm assuming by "not war wins" you mean not the amount of points they finished with, but the actual ranking position they finished on. If that's the case, why do you think using their positional ranking better?Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOne
It doesn't work without a way to gain significant WW points and honor off a kingdom who doesn't want to war you -- it reflects the flaws that currently exist in the WW and honor charts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Palem
With nw/land it's easy: they don't want to fight, you hit them, you take significant land. Even with the honor changes, that's just not true for honor, and there's no way for it to be true for WW.
The old formula was literally lowest score wins; sum of land, nw and honor chart rankings.Quote:
Originally Posted by Anri
#1 nw/land was often competitive, but it tended to be won by a kd that ws more like top 5-10 for all 3 than #1 nw, #1 land, and 50th honor.
You're thinking of honor and war wins too much in terms of how the land/nw charts work. Land/NW is about pure force (i.e. if you don't give it to us, we're gonna take it). Honor and WW's work differently, but just because they work differently doesn't mean they don't work.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zauper
Lets just hire a panel of experts to come out with power ranking each utopian year... we can have a utopia espn with a live streaming analysis channel and such.. man we could rule the world with this idea
((land rank*3+NW Rank*2+Honor rank)/3)- war wins. Low score wins.Quote:
Originally Posted by Palem
BB = (2*3+1*2+30)/3 = 9.6
Shinra = (33+20+4)/3 = 14
pewpew = (6+4+60)/3-3 = 20
CR = (3+6+33)/3-1 = 13
seems reasonable. Not going to win without being top 5 land/nw though. You could of course change the weighting but its very clean as 3 2 1 :P