IcePack wrote: chemefreak wrote:
IcePack wrote:I don't see any CL results there? The reason I mentioned that is there were quite a glut of same day entries in the info I was provided which effects the rankings.
I'll take my info and compare to that link.
We don't keep track of CL results. Only wars. Our file is the official record. If there is a glut of entries on certain dates in our data that is because those wars ended on that date. Nothing we can do about that! Also, if wars end on the same date, we try to find the last game played of each war and determine which one ended first. This was extremely important for the ladder and even though that is not active anymore we still pay attention to that variable.
Understood. However for CL results that you don't track, do you do the same date entry check when you move to completed? IE: if you move all CL first rounds together do they all bear the same date or do you check the final date on those as well?
They are not moved all at the same time, however, for instance, Phase I - Division X - CL4 was not moved until the final game ended AND the TOs had completely updated all the charts, games, etc. then asked me to move them. (Which could have been days, if not weeks later) So let's say Otpisani had 5 series in the their division. The 1st series may have been over 7-10 weeks prior to it being moved to closed. You will have to go through the games and determine when the last one ended for each series...thus the reason we don't track those!
Also, let me point out one very important thing that goes all the way back to jpcloet...the clan leagues are TOURNAMENTS and not wars. Accordingly, they involve "forced" pairings. jpcloet never wanted to include these in official rankings since they may involve "unfair" challenges. Remember when we would not issue medals for the CCup? This was jpcloet's mandate because the tournament style events encourage unfair match-ups, especially at the beginning. Now, what changed with the CCup was the "go live" of the leap ladder. Basically, in the leap system, the rankings would not be effected by a high ranked clan demolishing a low ranked clan since there would be no movement on the ladder. This is what finally allowed the CCup match-ups to get medals and have their results included on the war tables. The CL match-ups are forced, way too small to yield accurate results, and a bitch to track the "mini-wars" contained therein. They also include map restrictions that apply to other challenges. So within each mini-challenge you can only use a map once. So by playing a clan earlier you have a wider range of maps to choose. Thus, the later games are not entirely reflective of the strength of your clan since you were map limited by the tournament structure.
Everyone likes the F400 because it pops out rankings that seem right. Which is fine with us. We are glad that it seems to work for everyone. However, if you really look into it, you will see real shortcomings of a formula like this when you start tracking different types of events using only one formula.
My advice would be to go through every CL event and determine when each "mini-war" ended to accurately get your results. However, since everyone's results would be skewed equally, perhaps pick the end date of the last one to end overall and use that result for EVERY "mini-war" for that certain event, at that level. Then your results may be skewed, but all done so equally, especially with the decay factor coming into play.