#### DeletedUser

##### Guest

dead history

Last edited by a moderator:

You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

dead history

Last edited by a moderator:

Just because you take a city from an alliance doesn't mean you are "better". If they are building and growing their alliance right, the losses don't count as much. If an alliance is building poorly, a loss will count against them more. It reflects in the numbers.

How is Drunk Empire so high, when their average ABP per player Is only 1833, and The Exiled ABP per player is 4152, which is twice that.

As I said, it's a mathematical formula that factors square roots of conquest gains/losses and points per player and abp/dbp, etc. blah blah math math. As soon as they start taking losses, they will drop as a loss will factor against them more due to their smaller alliance number and lower points (city and abp/dpb) - but right now, at this moment they haven't so their number is strong. Plus, maybe the way they have built their ocean is preventing anyone from taking any cities. This would also be indicated in the formula...that if they've built an impenetrable ocean, then they deserve a high ranking. but once their ocean is breached with a city takeover, their ranking will fall.

Next week, we'll see where things are.

Calm down sgtseeker

"Just because you take a city from an alliance doesn't mean you are "better". If they are building and growing their alliance right, the losses don't count as much. If an alliance is building poorly, a loss will count against them more. It reflects in the numbers."

I think experience players per members should be adding to this "mathematical formula".

Share: