...for seriously pwning on all non-FFA servers...

http://www.earthempires.com/gameprofile?id=688

and well done to llaar for pwning FFA...

thanks :P

here's my stats:

http://www.earthempires.com/gameprofile?id=494

llaar should have 100% attack success. :P

Off topic!

I demand a had a lot of land and managed to die with it category!

Grats :)

grats!

How do i se mine ? :(

Yeah I can't find out how to determine my ID

"Countries and Statistics" link.

If you want the id, you can find yourself on a leaderboard. That will be the generic public link to your profile. You need to have a game and forum account linked in order to be viewed by other people.

Thanks Slagpit.

I don't like how NW is combined on Alliance server. My best is $96M NW and my total is $102M NW (because we've warred every other set except for that one). So my ranking is way off because even a n00b could obtain $102M NW over 5 or 6 resets now. Possible to have it list your best NW instead of combined total? Or list both?

Example A: you

As I said, I had 1 netting set and the rest were all wars. Stop being a douche.

thomas has a hard time admitting im gooder

Thomas: I was mistaken, the easiest way is to look next to your forum name: 549.

We're looking at other leaderboards right now. Right now I don't think that defending accuracy really serves any purpose.

For stats to be 100% relevant you would have to take into account the tag you played in. Then determine if that tag warred that set or not. So defends would actually serve a purpose.

And would be nice to see attacks split up into LGs and Special Attacks.

etc etc. I could throw out several ideas, but I'm not sure how in depth you guys want the statistics to be. Or how difficult it would be to make them accurate.

oh, found it, i like, all time kills and hits :D

PS : Thanks Slag

llaar is ranked too high

test

woot. Memberid=23
I WIN!
:P

Total Land

Rank Name Score
1 llaar 123,324,122
2 MrCobalt 4,182,062

really? how the hell is that even possible

he had a 70M acre country? heh

easy, alot self farming and no 2b-limit.

main thing was it was before we implemented unredueced DR for ghost acres

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wG6Cgmgn5U

he must have alot of time on his hands

best nw and land for a reset would be nice. also, including FFA really blurrs this for any other servers

you can get server by server-stats too.

http://alliance.www.earthempires.com/serverprofile?id=2

Win. :)

that's lame even my restarts finish higher than that.

More restarts = Win.

Best 3 for NW is your best 3 NW rounds. Why not do that for all the stats? Obviously an alliance that wars every reset is going to have more hits, kills, pop killed than one that wars less often. That doesn't necessarily make them more efficient.

Why exactly are we attempting to measure efficiency of alliances in war through individual statistics?

Efficiency of that individual. Whether or not that person wars relies on the alliance they're in. Just because they don't war as often, doesn't make them as good.

Just because you bang your gf 3x a day doesn't mean you're good at it. Catch mi drifto?

his point Thomas is that when netting how well a clan does is pretty much a sum of individual statistics. When warring, individual statistics can be very misleading.

Just as one example and this is surely not exhaustive, player A might have way more hits than player B, which seems like a good thing until you realize that is because player B has to break alot for his alliance, or even worse lemming (which means fewer attacks/civs killed/successful attacks/ etc. for player B, who in fact was more important to the war effort...) So there is really no way to judge by statistics alone who individually had a "good" or "bad" war...

On the other hand if an alliance netgains and player A gets more NW than player B then odds are player A had a better set...

The warring leaderboards are pretty much for fun. If you want to take them seriously, try comparing yourself relative to others. For example:

"I only warred Y sets in alliance, but I'm ranked X on the pop killed leaderboards! That seems pretty good."

or

"I have a lot less attacks than my clanmates. Maybe I should step it up."

Nowhere on the leaderboards does it say "This player is the best" or "This player is the most efficient". That's not really the point. It's also probably not really possible for us to calculate.

Bobby provided a nice explanation, but it's even worse than that. You could argue that a good warring alliance will end their wars quickly and decisively. Therefore, their members will have less attacks, defends, missiles, and pop killed than other people precisely because their alliance is good at war.

And that works for netters too, as the best netting alliances provide the best tag protection etc etc. It works both ways...

you didn't play at Swirve's Limited or FFA?