Jump to content


The REAL 3rd Capaign Ranking


  • Please log in to reply
37 replies to this topic

gen1je #1 Posted 17 December 2014 - 02:30 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Clan Diplomat
  • 23876 battles
  • 596
  • Member since:
    06-30-2011

The REAL 3rd Campaign Ranking

<a href='http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02194/aintree-ladies_2194385b.jpg' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'>http://i.telegraph.c...es_2194385b.jpg</a>

 

THE RESULTS:

 

<a href='http://i.imgur.com/dLhXtQi.png' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'>http://i.imgur.com/dLhXtQi.png</a>

 

1.  CRUSH

2. KAZNA

3. RSOP

 

Congratulations to winners! Great job!

The formula:

Higher ratio=better.  Like we see crush won this with big margin. This ranking represents the which clan has the best players, the most efficient. Ofc Crush lost in WG ranking but only because they have 44 active players while rsop used all 100. I did the math which clans players did the best job and here we have the results:

 

151818,181818182 44 14 6680000 crush
119759,036144578 83,00 2 9940000 kazna
92800 100 1 9280000 rsop

Edited by Mak0r, 17 December 2014 - 07:52 PM.


napalmisaatana #2 Posted 17 December 2014 - 02:40 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 20214 battles
  • 37
  • Member since:
    08-04-2012

*
POPULAR



gen1je #3 Posted 17 December 2014 - 02:45 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Clan Diplomat
  • 23876 battles
  • 596
  • Member since:
    06-30-2011
30j5vnn.jpg


gRuMM3l #4 Posted 17 December 2014 - 02:47 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 9200 battles
  • 661
  • Member since:
    09-24-2014
lol....

xardas060 #5 Posted 17 December 2014 - 02:48 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 31829 battles
  • 183
  • Member since:
    05-21-2011
lmfo

HammeriEX #6 Posted 17 December 2014 - 02:50 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 27340 battles
  • 77
  • [RSOP] RSOP
  • Member since:
    02-28-2011


Btw, who are CRUSH?

von_chom #7 Posted 17 December 2014 - 03:00 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 17146 battles
  • 1,409
  • [_CALM] _CALM
  • Member since:
    09-18-2010
+1 since i was looking forward to this topic for some time already :popcorn:

Legendary_Pinocchio #8 Posted 17 December 2014 - 03:03 PM

    Sergeant

  • WGL PRO Player
  • 42604 battles
  • 263
  • [R41N] R41N
  • Member since:
    07-01-2011


PsychoMike #9 Posted 17 December 2014 - 03:19 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • WGL PRO Player
  • 19527 battles
  • 353
  • Member since:
    03-27-2011
RSOP is making some serious progress on mak0r rankings, +1 :B

johar111 #10 Posted 17 December 2014 - 03:34 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 52323 battles
  • 3,976
  • [RO_SR] RO_SR
  • Member since:
    07-12-2013

View PostHammeriEX, on 17 December 2014 - 01:50 PM, said:



Btw, who are CRUSH?

 

:D

+1



MysLiwYy_ #11 Posted 17 December 2014 - 03:37 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 45768 battles
  • 500
  • [FEST] FEST
  • Member since:
    08-05-2010
Posted Image

L4NDe #12 Posted 17 December 2014 - 03:39 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 45623 battles
  • 164
  • [SPALE] SPALE
  • Member since:
    01-15-2012

View PostHunterZ0rd, on 17 December 2014 - 02:03 PM, said:

 

​Yep, what a shame it truly is to have mak0r as clan diplomat. ​

Blue_Badger #13 Posted 17 December 2014 - 03:42 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 14504 battles
  • 2,440
  • [3VS27] 3VS27
  • Member since:
    09-25-2012
It's a bit like saying the 3rd Reich beat the Red Army because they had a better KD. Nice try but the bigger clans were still the better campaign machines. 

thevisi #14 Posted 17 December 2014 - 04:07 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 25107 battles
  • 3
  • Member since:
    10-22-2011

View PostHammeriEX, on 17 December 2014 - 01:50 PM, said:



Btw, who are CRUSH?

 

Never heard of them.

 

This is for you Mak0r http://goo.gl/u3vpwU



Anzezaf #15 Posted 17 December 2014 - 07:02 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 20905 battles
  • 1,280
  • Member since:
    04-15-2011
I love how he just wrote higher ratio is better and not explaining a single thing. How did you get to such numbers? For all we know we pulled them out of your [edited]LOL :teethhappy:

Venitus #16 Posted 17 December 2014 - 07:12 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 39519 battles
  • 1,295
  • [S3AL] S3AL
  • Member since:
    01-05-2011

View PostInfiltrat0r_, on 17 December 2014 - 07:02 PM, said:

I love how he just wrote higher ratio is better and not explaining a single thing. How did you get to such numbers? For all we know we pulled them out of your [edited]LOL :teethhappy:

 

He did that exactly, because the link to the ranking fo the other campaign show his formula was aimed at something different to measure the rank of a clan, gold. So Mak0r can be classified as a statistician using the stats that suit him best. If you want to compare campaigns you have to use the same method and disclose your formula. My advice would be to be more consistent as statistician, or just drop these silly ratings. No rating is perfect, but this one is obviously broken, even WG's rating is better.

gen1je #17 Posted 17 December 2014 - 07:44 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Clan Diplomat
  • 23876 battles
  • 596
  • Member since:
    06-30-2011

I see most of people are too new to the scene or just didnt get it so here are hints to get the whole idea: check old exnom's and nikilemos's rankings where they come out with formulas to present theirs clans as the best. My ranking is deeper because i also diss RSOP and other massive, 100 uber active members clans.

To all haters: do a better one but you cant. too low for that.

To RSOP: ask your clanmates who was owning them in this campaign a few battles in the row (no wins for rsop, only losses). Muppetti, Uralfish and company are familiar with that :)

Psychomike: this case was a hard one. Other clans failed too hard to put you lower <sadface>.


Edited by Mak0r, 17 December 2014 - 07:49 PM.


gen1je #18 Posted 17 December 2014 - 07:46 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Clan Diplomat
  • 23876 battles
  • 596
  • Member since:
    06-30-2011

View PostBlue_Badger, on 17 December 2014 - 02:42 PM, said:

It's a bit like saying the 3rd Reich beat the Red Army because they had a better KD. Nice try but the bigger clans were still the better campaign machines. 

 

Wrong. They are not. It is better to have two clans with 50 active members (+50 dead accounts as chips) than one with 100 active.

Edited by Mak0r, 17 December 2014 - 07:46 PM.


HammeriEX #19 Posted 17 December 2014 - 08:28 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 27340 battles
  • 77
  • [RSOP] RSOP
  • Member since:
    02-28-2011

View PostMak0r, on 17 December 2014 - 06:46 PM, said:

 

Wrong. They are not. It is better to have two clans with 50 active members (+50 dead accounts as chips) than one with 100 active.

 



Sarek1 #20 Posted 17 December 2014 - 08:49 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Clan Diplomat
  • 23846 battles
  • 452
  • [RSOP] RSOP
  • Member since:
    06-17-2011

Interesting statistics and nice pictures in the opening post. +1 for the nice math. In Finland we have one saying: a lie, whopper, statistics.

 

This is only academic but one key element is missing from your ranking count, Mak0r:

 

RSOP 100 members - 100 prize tanks (ULIphate promised to all of us fancy tenks if we would win! Hard to fullfill!) 100%

CRUSH ?


Edited by Sarek1, 17 December 2014 - 08:50 PM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users