| Author |
|
Silverlake 
Forum Warrior
Joined: 15 Oct 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 417
|
 Posted: 22 Nov 2012 at 00:34 |
 Arakamis wrote:
Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital. ~ Aaron Levenstein
|
|
 |
Mona Lisa
Wordsmith
Joined: 22 Feb 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 120
|
Posted: 21 Nov 2012 at 23:45 |
Llyorn Of Jaensch wrote:
Lies, damn lies, and statistics.
|
... and how often do we get to quote Mark Twain in Illy?
+ 1
|
|
|
|
twilights
Postmaster
Joined: 21 May 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 915
|
Posted: 21 Nov 2012 at 23:07 |
|
we were not that prepared for this war as we were in tournament play..war economy is completely different than peace economy or the previous mentioned tournament economy. however as the war progresses each member is making the changes to maintain war for quite some time as well as continue adding buildings and castles, war isnt really an end all to playing other things in illyriad, what we are experiencing is a joining together of players in the alliance....war seems more active alliance play factor and its a shame that it wasnt a normal part of illyriad play as i am certain there would be a larger number of players involved in the game
|
|
Arakamis
Greenhorn
Joined: 09 Jul 2012
Location: Waterdeep
Status: Offline
Points: 97
|
Posted: 21 Nov 2012 at 22:33 |
Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital. ~ Aaron Levenstein
:) My apologies if i offended anyone with this, i just couldn't resist after all those arguments about that damn' statistics. :)
|
|
Llyorn Of Jaensch
Postmaster
Joined: 31 Mar 2010
Location: Sydney
Status: Offline
Points: 924
|
Posted: 21 Nov 2012 at 22:27 |
|
Lies, damn lies, and statistics.
|
|
"ouch...best of luck."
HonoredMule
|
|
Deranzin
Postmaster
Joined: 10 Oct 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 845
|
Posted: 21 Nov 2012 at 18:20 |
Mogul wrote:
No. Those stats are accurate and also quite relevant to the war. |
They are as relevent as that statistic that said that "98% of the people that have a car accident have been known to have drunk water at least once in the last hours before the accident ........ ergo water is a huge factor causing car accidents."  
Things are pretty simple : There is the truth, the lies and then there are statistics. Three totally different things.
Now, you believe that stacking everything as a quantity without taking any quality factors in mind and labeling that aaaaall these things (even pre-organised exoduses like mine, disolved alliances merging with others, small settlements counting as full cities, etc etc) as war related AND put in a nice result for you and your side, is actually of any use other than a PR bubble.
On the other hand I know that given enough statistics and figures, one can make even Greece a viable economy, let alone lighting up something like those basic statistics in his favour ...
| Especially to the question if this war is illy armagedon or to questions how destructive it is. |
On that, I can agree.
| It is not possible to see who is winning or loosing from it, but maybe because no one is winning or loosing or everyone is loosing? As someone already wrote here winning/loosing also depends on goals which are quite unclear (at least to me). |
Nope ... even if the winning/losing objective was definite, those stats would still not be any good for that decision because it would still unclude many irrelevant data ( like my town's planned exodus which was bundled conveniently as "war-related" ) as "critical" for its conclusion/result.
However I understand that seeing some facts like Consone or VIC having bigger population after more than month long war with H? might be disappointing for you.  |
First of all, I cannot be disappointed by erroneous interpretetions of stacked information and statistics ... "creative logistics" is not something that can impress me, nor disappoint me ...
Second of all, I think that same observation you just made stands true for Harmless? as well ... we definitely didn't have 13115508 population on any of the last occasions that I checked, but we do have that number today. Still, unlike you, I do not think that this small quantity observation means in any way that we are "winning". Persians (and many other empires) also thought that wars were only about population, wealth and land conquered, but we all know how "great" that idea worked in the end.
Third point is that we ALL know that Consone was always bigger in population terms than Harmless? ... so shuffling around your members is not really helping anyone, but the figures ... 
Last but not least, I do not think that Harmless? needs public PR statistical boosts to uphold morale within its ranks, and that most people participating in the war have an understanding of the current status far better than any number-cooking can dish out ...
| Btw. between 22 Sep. and 20 Nov. are not three months. |
True, they are two months, but that was not my point, was it .?. :p
Epimyth :
Noone even attacked Saermon Darmanthor and you counted its exodus as a "war casualty" and there are other similar and more serious mistakes in your data ... but you, instead of worrying about the veracity of the information you gathered, are not only ignoring such corrections, but you are trying to pretend that we are crazy and the sun is actually rising from the North.
After that, despite your hard work, I cannot really take you seriously into consideration. I suggest you show the proper respect to your OWN EFFORT and correct and validate your "bulk" data before you serve them in the forums as " the truth". Have a nice day. |
|
KillerPoodle
Postmaster General
Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 1853
|
Posted: 21 Nov 2012 at 16:33 |
Mogul wrote:
No. Those stats are accurate and also quite relevant to the war. Especially to the question if this war is illy armagedon or to questions how destructive it is. It is not possible to see who is winning or loosing from it, but maybe because no one is winning or loosing or everyone is loosing? As someone already wrote here winning/loosing also depends on goals which are quite unclear (at least to me).
However I understand that seeing some facts like Consone or VIC having bigger population after more than month long war with H? might be disappointing for you.
Btw. between 22 Sep. and 20 Nov. are not three months.
|
They are accurate to a point - but they miss many things - like the dissolution of FF and merge of most of it's pop into EE
|
|
"This is a bad idea and we shouldn't do it." - endorsement by HM
"a little name-calling is a positive thing." - Rill
|
|
Le Roux
Wordsmith
Joined: 30 May 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 151
|
Posted: 21 Nov 2012 at 16:22 |
As an uninvolved 3rd party, one who at best gets insight into the war progress by reviewing herald reports of seiges, troop movements, attack and defensive losses, as pretty as these alliance population/city tables may be, they really do not tell me anything about the progress or lack of progress of a war. Completely eye candy and not helpful to get insight into the realities of war. From my experience, Illy wars are not based on population elimination, but rather on the ability (or will) of one side or the other to continue to attack and/or defend. So long as both sides have troops, and the will to keep fighting, i would surmise the war goes on indefinitely. It is easy to see that troops can eventually just run out, without any change whatsoever in population, so pop / # cities is a rather terrible means of measuring conflict. Illy pop is instant, troops are not, as evidenced in this last tourney, it is amazingly easy to burn through 3 months of troop production, and no matter how big you are.. painfully slow to rebuild. The only real measure of the war would be to somehow take the pulse of the morale/ability to wage war on each side, and somehow, I do not think it is possible to ever get an unbiased view of that. I'd love to know how well each alliance was prepared for war, how well each is able to recoup losses, how well supplied each is, how active each membership may be, how determined each is, how baddly they have been depleted, how big are their reserves, how much prestige are they willing to spend, how cohesive are their military plans, sooo many variables, and not a single one of them measurable independently. So the peanut gallery pretty much just gets to sit and watch. (and no doubt get to look at more number crunching an pretty charts and graphs that tell equally little about what is goin on...) ... grabs more popcorn.. and looks at the herald again...
Edited by Le Roux - 21 Nov 2012 at 16:23
|
|
|
|
Mogul
Forum Warrior
Joined: 23 Sep 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 233
|
Posted: 21 Nov 2012 at 15:15 |
Deranzin wrote:
Actually we are saying the same thing, that these stats are impractical and inaccurate on the matter of the war, especially on the matter on who is winning, ergo they are just creating an impression here to the casual reader while, in fact, they are mostly irrelevant with the war. Sp, since you agree with me (the bolded parts) in the essense of the matter, then you might agree that all those stats are more suitable to a totally different thread with a title like "A small quantitative case study of alliance town fluxations during a period of three months with no quality measurements what-so-ever".
Right .?. |
No. Those stats are accurate and also quite relevant to the war. Especially to the question if this war is illy armagedon or to questions how destructive it is. It is not possible to see who is winning or loosing from it, but maybe because no one is winning or loosing or everyone is loosing? As someone already wrote here winning/loosing also depends on goals which are quite unclear (at least to me).
However I understand that seeing some facts like Consone or VIC having bigger population after more than month long war with H? might be disappointing for you.
Btw. between 22 Sep. and 20 Nov. are not three months.
|
|
Deranzin
Postmaster
Joined: 10 Oct 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 845
|
Posted: 21 Nov 2012 at 14:50 |
Grego wrote:
H's coalition and "Soup" are definetly two different social concepts. You are trying to prove that one is better than other. It's like debating is green prettier than red, or day better than night.
|
Oh, come on, do not get abstract notions like "pretty" and "taste" in matters that can actually be measured, compared and criticised with objective measures ...
It is not a matter of what different kind of fruit we like or even whether we prefer tony's apples from vincent's apples (imaginary names) ... it is just a matter of whether tony or vincent has the most organised and efficient farm between those two.
The first is a matter of taste and, indeed, it cannot be argued because it is not a matter or reason, but a matter or personal preference (which itself is not always subjected to rational "motives").
The second is a matter of quantity, quality, organisation, existence of structures and other infrastructure, who has better equipment, who goes earlier to work, who organises his workers better etc etc ... all these CAN be measured in real life and are being measured in all aspects of life ... simple business theory, this time, along with sociology says "hi". 
|
|
Tweet
So who's winning and is it really Illy armageddon?
Topic Options
