07-11-2009 03:11 #1
Fooglmog
Fooglmog is offline
Regular

Join Date
Sep 2008
Posts
81

All-time Earth 2025 Alliance Rankings

In my view, alliances ought to be judged based upon their ability to affect the overall political situation of the game.

In attempting to develop a statistical model that would most fairly reflect this power throughout the history of the game, I decided to base my analysis upon the reset-end rankings of alliances as indicated by total NW.

The reason I chose total NW is quite simple. Neither a 20 member alliance with great netgainers nor a 500 member spam-tag has the ability to affect the politics of the game. However, they do have the ability to rank highly within avg. nw and total members. With very few exceptions, total NW does translate directly into political leverage. Also, apart from these three statistics, there are no statistics that have been kept through a large enough time-frame in this game upon which to base a judgement.

The reason I'm basing my analysis upon the ranking -- as opposed to, say, the actual total NW -- is because this game has changed substantially over the years. It's clear that changes in formulas as well as changes in the number of bots (both as a source of threat and a source of land) in game has a drastic effect on what total NW is attainable. This change is not necessarily reflective of the skill or dominance of the alliances of any given era. And so, I've decided that the fairest method of comparison is between alliances of the same era, rather than between alliances that existed years apart. As such, the final ranking (based upon TNW) of each reset is what has been taken into account.

Of course, even these basic stats weren't available prior to the reset beginning in October of 1999. As such, that is the first reset from which I drew statistics. This of course means that alliances that existed prior to then, but no longer in October of 1999 are not included within my rankings (most notably RoCK) and some alliances that only existed for a short time after this date are ranked lower than they might otherwise be.

Having decided this, my methodology was quite simple. I took the top 10 alliances (by TNW) from each reset. To the alliance that finished in first, I assigned 10 points. Each rank descending from there received one less point until the 10th place alliance received 1 point.

Going through the resets in this manner, I tallied the points for alliances over the whole history of the game.

Clearly this system favours alliances that existed over long periods of time. In my opinion, this is only right. Alliances that have existed for long periods ought to be ranked higher than those that only existed briefly.

This system also assigns disadvantage to those alliances that preferred to war. Unfortunately, this was unavoidable. The complications brought about by any attempt at incorporating war stats into this analysis were insurmountable.

This system also ignores a swathe of alliances that existed for long periods of time but never or rarely penetrated to top 10 TNW. Again, it's my belief that alliances that could never entered into the top 10 were not truly major political influences. Arguements could be made that some of these alliances were in fact more influential than short-lived alliances that did penetrate the top 10. That is, perhaps, the case. For that reason, the statistics that I have put together become less valuable as a tool for analysis the further down the list you proceed. I hope that you will all take this fact at face value and realize that no statistical analysis can ever be perfect. This is a flaw in mine.

A note on how I dealt with multi-tagged alliances and mergers:

When alliances had multiple tags that were in the top 25 TNW, I combined their TNWs and adjusted the ranks of all alliance rankings in that reset accordingly. An example of this occurring was with UCN when they maintained their primary tag and a separate tag for their bootcamp members.

When alliances maintained multiple tags but not all were in the top 25 TNW, those not in the top 25 were disregarded.

When alliances merged, the statistics carried on with the alliance that had more points at the time of the merger, however the points from prior to the merger were not added together. Thus, all points that were earned by TIE & Immortal Seawolf after their merger were added to TIE's total. However, the points that Seawolf had earned prior to that point in history remained a separate entry on the list.

I have also done my best to account for continuity of alliances where name-continuity did not exist. For example, points earned by "RED" are included under those listed as belonging to "Evolution". Of course, there is considerable debate in some cases over whether certain alliances are new creations or simply renamed old alliances. In most cases where such debate exists, I have left the alliances as separate entries. You, of course, are welcome to add together the combined scores of entries that you believe to be a single alliance.

One final note, because Earth Council has become the main server for clans, I had to make the decision as to when precisely to stop using stats from the alliance server and begin using EC stats. Looking at statistics from the time near the start of EC, it seemed to me that the point at which the majority of alliances had switched to EC was the reset beginning in June of 2007. As such, the last reset where I used Alliance stats was the reset beginning in March of 2007, and EC stats began in the reset beginning in June of that year. I recognize that alliances that switched earlier or later than this date may find this unfair, but again there was no perfect solution to this problem and I did my best.

Alas, enough exposition. Here are the rankings:

La Famiglia - 340
The Infernal Elite - 267
Moral Decay - 188
Rival - 185
Paradigm - 179
Monsters - 167
Omega - 154
Sons of Liberty - 124
Sky Elitez - 124
Evolution - 121
La Cosa Nostra - 117
Rage - 117
Survival of the Fittest - 113
Netters Anonymous - 84
Arrow - 72
Illuminati X - 70
Infernal Council of Nations - 70
Elysium - 49
United Council of Nations - 47
TeamHunters - 27
Sanctuary - 24
Unholy Monks - 21
Genesis - 20
Legion - 15
Silent Warriors - 13
Star Leage - 13
Universal Soldiers Insane Multi Posse - 13
Unforgiven - 11
Death Before Disco - 10
Titans - 9
Armageddon - 8
Saints - 8
The Great Alliance - 8
Devils Advocates - 7
Immortal Seawolf - 7
The Club - 7
AzN Dynasty - 6
Huge Alliance of Nations - 6
Mid Knight Riders - 6
Steel - 6
Marked For Death - 5
The HeadHunters - 5

Imaginary Numbers - √-1

I chose to cut off alliances that did not earn at least 5 points throughout the history of the game.

Once again, these rankings are not perfect. But, I made serious efforts to ensure that they are meaningful and, I hope, interesting to all of you on some level.

Cheerio!

-Fooglmog
Guy with no clue.

Are you suggesting someone does this from the start of earthempires?

I see ArMageddon on there!

iScode

That would be pretty cool if they did. I just found this and thought it was nifity.

Looks good, just put MD as #2

Red, well off you go :P

Thanks for volunteering Red.

that ranking of steel is offensive

Hey its not foogs fault they kept getting deleted!!!

Okay, nothing better to do, so here you go:

By Total Networth:

1. LaF – 201
2. Omega – 165
3. Evolution – 129
4. Monsters – 114
5. LCN – 89
6. ResDogs – 80
7. Moral Decay – 73
8. Sanctuary – 62
9. SoF – 61
10. TIE – 60
11. PDM – 57
12. Netters Anonymous – 51


And pound for pound strength by Average Networth:

1. Omega – 196
2. LaF – 160
3. Evolution – 140
4. Monsters – 139
5. ResDogs – 113
6. LCN/Sanctuary – 68
7. …
8. PDM – 56
9. MD/TIE – 47
10. …
11. ICN/NeoFed – 45
12. …


I have the results from below rank 12 for all those alliances that managed to make top Ten at any point in Total Networth or Average Networth. I would like to mention that DANGER was the only alliance to be added to my list of alliances when I compiled the list for Average Networth (the second list compiled).

sol is ranked too high

i agree with lcn ranking

RD should be removed angel :P

I considered that, but not all RD members cheated and while the offenses are enough to drive the alliance from the game and see all their countries deleted (in that set), it's not sufficient to warrant the deletion of the efforts by those members who did not cheat. Unless and until the game admins seek to purge RD from gaming records, they should remain.

If I had considered all of their top tens vacated, then all it would change would be to move all the alliances ranked below RD up one position. Vacated points would simply not be awarded at all.

Just goes to show that Evo wars too much, otherwise we'd prolly be higher than Omega for average net :P

And by the same token, Laf would be higher as well, since we usually war each other, hahaha

RIVAL will catch up to you... i'm trying to put everyone in the shape of netting and. That is all for now :)))

If you are talking about Pound for Pound, I am suggesting we weight the Top 25 finishes 25,24,23....2,1.

And a quick tally. Honorable Mention to DK, first reset back and they have already out done RAGE and ICN.
MD coming back and sitting out some wars really boosted their rankings. Surprisingly SoF beat out LCN and Monsters.
And RD's initial few resets of land trading really helped the numbers.

LaF and EVO was neck and neck until this past year, where LaF had 3 resets where they absolutely dominated the Top 10, Set 17,18,19, followed by a few sets where it was even battle. and Last reset at 24, LaF took most of top 20.

LaF 2455
EVO 1497
Omega 942
RD 897
MD 437
SoF 259
LCN 218
Monsters 196
NeoFed 149
KSF 128
NA 66
RIVAL 41
SOL 27
EEVIL 24
TIE 22
DK 15
ICN 13
RAGE 3

I also have the above post done by % of T1, T3, T5, T10, T25, T50. as well up to set 15?

I don't know where I put that file, I probably have to re-do one just for giggles.

i loved playing in ARM

I loved my reset in ArM too, other than having to play with Trife

lol

i like playing with trife.