Spreadsheet comparing the 2 sides of the war
Printed From: Illyriad
Category: The World
Forum Name: Politics & Diplomacy
Forum Description: If you run an alliance on Elgea, here's where you should make your intentions public.
URL: http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/forum_posts.asp?TID=5389
Printed Date: 17 Apr 2022 at 14:43
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Spreadsheet comparing the 2 sides of the war
Posted By: Sir A
Subject: Spreadsheet comparing the 2 sides of the war
Date Posted: 13 Jan 2014 at 08:22
|
A while back someone made a topic about where the most powerful players are...now I present to you a comparison of the sov/troop production of all the alliances on both sides of the war. The spreadsheet compares both sides statistics on each individual alliance involved and on both sides as a whole. These stats won't necessarily tell which alliances are the best at war but it will give some kind of idea as to where each alliance stands in terms of troop production...which will give a kind of idea as to how fast an alliance can make troops assuming the alliances use most of their sov for troop production bonuses and are constantly producing troops. It also compares some other things that you can check out. Let me know if I made any mistakes or missed anything. Everything is color coded and there should be no bias. Just numbers. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Aiw5EJcJ_qYzdFJtNnJFY0M5Slk1Wkpxd0ljdkNVUnc&usp=sharing" rel="nofollow - Spreadsheet
|
Replies:
Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 13 Jan 2014 at 08:36
|
/me goes out to claim more sov I'm guessing that the spreadsheet assumes everything is troop sov? Alliances that support large cities with lots of food sov might end up looking more powerful than they actually are. I can only speak for my armies, and they can't fight their way out of a paper bag. That is, if they could find the bag to begin with.
|
Posted By: Halcyon
Date Posted: 13 Jan 2014 at 08:47
| Need reinforcments Rill? |
Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 13 Jan 2014 at 08:54
| I don't know, everyone just tells me where to go and what to do. |
Posted By: Yhina
Date Posted: 13 Jan 2014 at 09:32
|
besides what Rill point out on whether those sov lands are used for troops or just for food ( higher level sov lands are more likely to be food bonuses, while low ones 1-2, most likely for troop bonuses) , you are considering just sov I for each sov land? Ex. you average sov lands per town.. and if you get, lets say 10, you say average bonus 50%? Which would be true only IF all sov lands were level 1... Considering the linear cost for sov II from sov I ( and becoming exponential after that point), it would be safer to assume that most of those sov lands are level II than I. And probably reducing a few sov lands, on the averaged land per town result, to reflect food sov, could lead to more "accurate" average results. |
Posted By: Brandmeister
Date Posted: 13 Jan 2014 at 12:32
|
While this is a nice effort to be scientific, I think the assumption that "most sov is used for troops" pretty much breaks the entire premise. Some alliances have many big cities with 8x Farmstead V (or Fishery V). Other alliances have mostly 8x Military III around their cities. Comparing those two configurations is apples to oranges. Even more so if the Farmstead V counts as 5 points (when it should be 0), but the Military III counts as 3 points. A better methodology would be to eliminate all squares with Sov IV and V, assuming they are Farmsteads or Fisheries. Also eliminate all sovereignty claims over 20 for a city. I suspect this is spreadsheet just takes the alliance stat page Lands Claimed stat. Many people have pointed out that Consone spent a lot of time talking about the math. The numbers don't mean much unless you filter out all the noise, and that is certainly no small task. |
Posted By: Elmindra
Date Posted: 13 Jan 2014 at 14:12
|
If you have 8x Farmsteads V then you are not a military town period. A military town has 18-20 sovs level 2-3 all devoted to troop production.
------------- 
|
Posted By: Brandmeister
Date Posted: 13 Jan 2014 at 14:38
|
I agree that it really isn't a military town. However, large cities can support larger numbers of troops (to a point), so population can't be dismissed entirely. As I said in other posts that tried to compare numbers: while it is difficult to do a quick comparison of stats, you can identify military players and alliances simply by looking at a few cities. |
Posted By: JimJams
Date Posted: 13 Jan 2014 at 16:58
|
While all the notes other made on the previous posts are valid, still those numbers are interesting reading.
------------- 
|
Posted By: geofrey
Date Posted: 13 Jan 2014 at 18:30
I believe it is possible to access the sov. information through the api/data info. ------------- http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/45534" rel="nofollow">  |
Rill wrote:Posted By: geofrey
Date Posted: 13 Jan 2014 at 18:33
|
I believe the number of barracks/cities an alliance has also factors into it. I suppose you could divide by average city size of Elgea to get a rough estimate, but there is nothing average about these alliances.
------------- http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/45534" rel="nofollow"> |
Posted By: Praetor Nistiner
Date Posted: 13 Jan 2014 at 18:41
|
Thank u for taking time to create these its very interesting. ------------- Tutela 111-Sir Bradly is surprisingly nice. SSH :D |
Posted By: Yhina
Date Posted: 13 Jan 2014 at 19:52
Just because a Ferrari is a faster car than one you can buy for a few thousand bucks, doesnt mean it is not a car at all !! So a military town can still be called military even if it does not devote all their sov lands ( and guess you said 18-20 to so noone dares to say than any of your towns, with 2 food dolmens, are by any means non military :P ). Whether it's fully optimal or not, that's a diferent business, but the same applies to having prestige, a better location (most of the times by early start ), more time to devote to the game ... or *cough* multi-ing *cough*.
Or multiplying "the average training bonus" by the number of towns, to figure out an equivalent value to 20rax towns with no bonuses ( to have something alike to compare). As you said, having a higher bonus, lets say 200%, when an alliance has 100 towns , would be able to train less troups than one with 500 towns and lower bonuses, or no bonuses at all. For granted, that there are trillion of other factors, like whether all the accounts are played, whether they train, whether all the towns have barracks 20 ( as some of those towns could still be small)... Older alliances usually have higher inactivity rate, but also some of the most hardcore players... *edited to add both coments on same post, to avoid double posting* |
Posted By: The Electrocutioner
Date Posted: 13 Jan 2014 at 21:01
|
Regardless of the caveats, I would like to say "nice job!" to Sir A for the spreadsheet.
So The Confeds have 14 alliances / 87 mil pop versus The Coalition with 9 alliances and 34 mil pop. If The Confeds can add a few more alliances, they might finally bring it up to an even fight!
 |
Posted By: Sir A
Date Posted: 14 Jan 2014 at 00:43
Thanks lol, to be quite honest this was never supposed to turn into a huge spreadsheet like this but it was 1 am and I got carried away as I always do when I start making spreadsheets at 1am...haha. To people that are saying that the numbers don't tell everything, I know that and I said as much with the first post. Its just a spreadsheet that I made for fun (pretty geeky I know :D) but I think it gives a very basic overall view of the entire war at a glance. There are still TONS of things unaccounted for and this war is way too big to even begin to keep track of all that stuff. P.S. I had no idea what to call the other side so any suggestions are welcome otherwise its staying as The Confeds
 |
Posted By: Sir Bradly
Date Posted: 14 Jan 2014 at 01:09
|
/me is not impressed with NC's sov per city. As a result of Sir A's fine work, heads are gonna roll here :P
SB ------------- [04:46]<HATHALDIR> okay,I'm a bully |
Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 14 Jan 2014 at 01:43
I think I should like us to be called We Who Should Not Be Named |
Posted By: jcx
Date Posted: 14 Jan 2014 at 02:13
aha! hahaha. ------------- Disclaimer: The above is jcx|orcboy's personal opinion and is not the opinion or policy of Harmless? [H?] or of the little green men that have been following him all day. jcx in H? | orcboy in H? |
Posted By: Mr Damage
Date Posted: 14 Jan 2014 at 02:16
Hasn't been a prerequisite for previous wars.
|
Posted By: Sir A
Date Posted: 14 Jan 2014 at 02:45
Haha but wait Sir B, NC is making troops at an average of 66% : )
I would get so tired of typing all of that all the time though
|
Posted By: Epidemic
Date Posted: 14 Jan 2014 at 03:17
|
Now I know why the market is flooded and has crashed, you're not producing troops fast enough! I'm just a trader and I had 125% troop sov bonus before I had to switch to food sov to work towards town #10. |
Posted By: scaramouche
Date Posted: 15 Jan 2014 at 17:56
I was gonna say according to the coalition during the consone war they never stopped bleating about how outnumbered they were against Consone...and bragging about how they were kicking "SOUP" ass, despite being outnumbered....lol...not bragging now! ------------- NO..I dont do the Fandango! |
Posted By: Gemley
Date Posted: 15 Jan 2014 at 21:52
|
Interesting. ------------- �I do not love the bright sword for it's sharpness, nor the arrow for it's swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend� - J.R.R. Tolkien |
Posted By: The Electrocutioner
Date Posted: 15 Jan 2014 at 23:22
You may have misunderstood me, Scara. I am totally bragging! ;)
|
Posted By: Mr Damage
Date Posted: 16 Jan 2014 at 01:15
At least this time the number claim is closer to being correct whereas last time it was plain false and no-one apart from Coal could have really known the true numbers because of their admitted secrecy protocols. Even now though, we cannot be 100% sure of Coals' numbers due to such secrecy policies. Brag away though.
|
Posted By: Darkwords
Date Posted: 21 Jan 2014 at 18:33
|
Out of interest do you intend to update the spreadsheet, whilst it is hardly an accurate study of strength it is the closest that anyone has put together so far. It would be interesting if perhaps you did a new tab each 2 weeks or maybe 4. ------------- <Deranzin> I'd agree with darkone on that [21:59]<ropadope> you know I am perverted <Bartleby> dark is upsetting some peeps |
Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 21 Jan 2014 at 18:37
| A graph with the change over time would also be interesting, could reveal trends. |
Posted By: Sir A
Date Posted: 21 Jan 2014 at 21:33
| Yeah I do intend to update it every 10 days and will try to make graphs once there are 2-3 updates. There have already been some pretty big changes in some alliances since 1/13/14 |
Posted By: Sir A
Date Posted: 24 Jan 2014 at 01:57
| As promised I updated the spreadsheet today and I also added a # of towns column. Wish I would have added it originally but oh well. Next update I may include graphs if I have time. |
Posted By: Darkwords
Date Posted: 26 Jan 2014 at 18:22
|
Cool, many thanks.
------------- <Deranzin> I'd agree with darkone on that [21:59]<ropadope> you know I am perverted <Bartleby> dark is upsetting some peeps |