Conquer:Loss ratios

[Santa367]

are u kidding, guys???
ive got 1,74 but in my winning games i let my last enemy conquer my lands so that i can take them back and have more xp and shrards... if i wouldnt do it id have like 2,3 or more... but i dont feel me the pro player...(i ususally play 8 men games on big maps)

[Chess435]

are u kidding, guys???
ive got 1,74 but in my winning games i let my last enemy conquer my lands so that i can take them back and have more xp and shrards... if i wouldnt do it id have like 2,3 or more... but i dont feel me the pro player...(i ususally play 8 men games on big maps)

Considering stuff like this, I may readjust the ratios for each rating.

[techgump]

I don't think you can adjust for it. As not everyone does it. It just goes to show that C/L alone is as unreliable as wins.

[Mossant26]

i dont got a screen shot but my stats r 4923 conqured and 2011 lost = 2.44 conquer/loss ratio and 60 wins in 321 games played = 19% win rate and lvl 16

[srmanofwar]

played: 188
won: 85
captured: 5107
lost: 2441

45% won
2.09:1 is my captured to lost ratio

[Jokern]

My is 1.78

conquered: 4562

lost: 2607

[BetaGen]

Win rate 40%
Conquer/Loss rate 1.74
Don't really think I'm pro dude...

[srmanofwar]

I'm now up to 47.5% wins
conquers still about 2.08:1

[adude159753]

Maybe if there was a split in statistics for conquered territories and lost territories and game types you may be able to standardize ranking or levels based on Conquer:Loss ratios. Of course you would need some complicated formula to make the conquered regions in conquer game types worth less. I had at one point about a 4:1 ratio because I played primarily conquer. Then once I switched my ratio has dropped but it is still about 2.6:1. Obviously I'm not as good as the players who play almost all full map though my ratio tells different. I don't think I deserve the highest title. I would think I fall somewhere in the middle. Maybe like a 1.5:1 ratio?

[BelgarionRiva]

The conquer/loss ratios are biased and the win/loss ratio are also biased to judge your "rank" as a player. Could the root of the variance multiplied by the difference of the average of the other players be used in order to determine rank?