Why elo rating system for CWs is flawed

Let's look at top coalitions list:


It's alright, best coalitions are on top... oh wait, there are 3 coalitions with less than 10 CWs played in top 3.



Worst coalitions indeed... but look at last two. Do you think they deserve to be the 2 last and not coalitions with 3 CWs played?

Elo system clearly promotes farming and inactivity.

But what would happen if you would get 100% CP for won match and 50% for lost? Every coalition would try their best in CWs. With elo system it's just top 2-3 coalitions with tons of oldschool EU players that smash other coalitions so the other coalitions just loose elo and never recieve it.

So instead of having coalitions with 50+ games on the very bottom of list and coalitions with less than 10 games in top 10, we'd have fair rating system that would make every coalition play if they want to keep their position.

Master of RP talks about cw

SM was in this position two seasons ago so we know what you mean (epic going from 800 and something seasonal elo to 1100+ in 2 seasons). The fix is easy, just make it clans need a minimum of 5-10 CWs to register on the leaderboards, and a minimum of 30 to reach top 3.

When I've attempted and succeeded at changing the clan war system, the administrators never implemented my minimum cw requirement.
http://atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=17862

As said in my link, a minimum number of CWs would allow there to be a decent enough sample size to rank clans. My solution then and now is to require clans to reach a certain number of CWs before being ranked for the season. It would at least encourage a few more CWs at the start of the season, and more accurately rank clans once everyone gets the minimum.

It's nice getting 4:1 or something, but how would a clan look if they're encouraged to get 25+, or even 40+ games? That's what I have aimed for. No reason for RD/noobs to be ranked below clans who have only played once.

Edit: Tact posted while I was typing my post. Same subject.

Napisano przez Guest, 13.02.2016 at 04:43

Master of RP talks about cw

Master of autowalling has spoken! Fear him!

(pls go home cause you're visibily drunk, I play all maps but RP, I played it maybe 2-3 times after I became r7 and it was when I was in mood to troll it)

Napisano przez The Tactician, 13.02.2016 at 04:53

Uh, but it still doesn't fix the issue. One coalition can play 10 CWs, farm others, become top 3 and not play at all after reaching top 3. As I said, elo system promotes inactivity and farming, not activity and teamplay skills.

Foreign Legion deserves #1, hasn't lost a single cw as only clan in the list!

We have been reforming the CW system over the past three years. Elo-rate system is by far the most probable selection. A minimum CW count requirement will have easily solved the problem you have relied on trying hard to deny the entire system.

It is not problem in whole Elo system, but in the minimum required number of CWs to be ranked on the list as Tact and Desu pointed out.
Also, Elo system is the best one ever and with the least possibility of unfairy things that were constantly happening in the prevouis system.
Here is all clear, you want to reach the top? Okay, start is the most easy, later when your Elo is higher, it is making things more complicated and not like in the last system where you could reach from last to the top place in 2 nights of CWing and all by luck of replacing...

PS. Deus Vult CWs should be perma removed

Lol,you cry about old cw system,it changed,now you cry again about this one,learn to if nothing dont cry.*-

Napisano przez Bisexual, 18.02.2016 at 09:00

Lol,you cry about old cw system,it changed,now you cry again about this one,learn to if nothing dont cry.*-

Learn to, if nothing, use space button on your keyboard. Also, press [1] for English. Thank you.

Napisano przez Dbacks, 14.02.2016 at 01:51

Foreign Legion deserves #1, hasn't lost a single cw as only clan in the list!

Now that u mention it....

Who cares