Thanks for a very nice feature! But this visualisation has a significant drawback: some clans finish the race early and fight only for 3 days. These players have 4 battles less, so even if they play well and score 800 average, they get 2400 which lowers their MA score. But if they had fought for 4 days, they would have received 3200 (with 800 avg) which should not lower their MA score.
1 reply
Thanks for the visualization!
A few comments:
If a player always plays duels, uses all his decks, plays no boat battles and has a 50% win chance for every battle, he reaches an average of 662.5 medals per day (not 650). This is caused by the fact that more medals are provided when duels last three rounds. So the weekly benchmark should be 2650 medals.
I’m pretty sure that the “performance score” used for matchmaking is not based on medals but on wins. Therefore it is possible to consistently make some more medals by using your best decks to win duels, at max. 700 medals per day on average.
Sometimes boat battles are good for the clan, but of course this will lower the average number of medals.
1 reply
I support what my partner says… I am the admin of several clans where I give passes to the best in war. but one of my clans ends the war in 3 days, and the players of that clan no longer add medals on the fourth day… even if they play, they do not add medals and that is why I cannot compare them against the players of the other clans that do add medals 4 days. My request is not to correct the graph, my request is to allow medals to be added on the fourth day even though we have already won the war.
I know this does not depend on you, it depends on the creators of Clahs Royale, but I would like to know if you can ask them to update the game with this change. Thank you
@Mikhail @xanderhernandez yes, we are aware of these limitations. Unfortunately there is nothing we can do to address it, so the simple answer is that this chart won’t properly cover all players. The most unfortunate part is that we cannot distinguish when this happens to label it appropriately; i.e.: we can’t distinguish a clan that finishes early from someone who skips Sunday’s battles.
Yes, we didn’t get into all the details to avoid unnecessary complexity, the truth is that expected averages can oscillate from 2400 to 2700 points per week, depending on the amount of Duel battles they play (from 0 to 3).
So anyway, the point of this line was mostly to provide a guide that highlights the weekly stabilisation and trends. There is a lot of noise in the data, so these variations shouldn’t make a big difference, but your observations are correct.
Thank you very much for your response and thank you for creating this page with so much statistical information, I congratulate you because you have done a very good job to make it easy to use.
I am going to issue this opinion in 2 parts/sections: The first one is based on a compliment towards their work, since they transform something playful, in this case a virtual videogame, into a concept of statistical learning.
It is also important to note that their contributions to what the Clash Royale microgame is, make each player understand, in a better way, what the intangible dynamics of this game are, that is, the numerical/statistical values.
Now my second part of this rationale is related to the topic at hand, in other words, clan wars 2 benchmarks and graphics display.
To make each of the values clear, I have to leave here the specific specification:
In the first place, if a player does not play duels during clan wars, and gets 2/4 on each of the days of war, that is, he has 50% of w.r., he will get 600 points, in other words 2,400 x war .
If you play duels , and play all 3 games during the 4 days , you will get 650 points , or 2,600 per war .
And if he wins the duels 2-0, that is, he plays 2 decks, he will have 700 points per day, 2,800 x war.
For this reason, the average of a standard player, that is, with 50% w.r. goes from 2,400 points to 2,800, and not only stagnates at 2,600 (ALTHOUGH I VERY WELL UNDERSTAND YOUR IDEAS OF TYPICALLY AT THAT POINT, AND I SUPPORT IT) .
To finish this argument, I will leave here the general parameters that each leader must take into account:
As well, I will establish an idea for you to take into account regarding the AVG of each player as soon as the wars are cut off on the third day of warfare.
We all know, or at least take into account, that the general average of each player, after finishing his last 10 wars, is calculated by dividing the total sum of his medals by the total number of wars played. For example : Medals earned 27,550 / 10 . Average: 2,755.
However, a conflict occurs when the wars are cut off on the third day. What I propose here is to divide the total value of medals by 9.75, or less, if there are many more wars that were cut on the third day.
For example : X player ( 28,550 medals in the last 10 wars , of which 9 ended on the fourth day and only one on the third ) . Calculation: 28.550/9.75. Average: 2,928.
This calculation will cause his AVG to go up, since if this player had played his last day, just his average would have gone up.
Another example : X player ( 29,000 medals in the last 10 wars , 6 finished on the 4th day , 4 on the 3rd )
Calculation: 29,000/9. Average: 3,222.
CLARIFICATION: FORMULAS TO USE THIS TACTIC.
4/10: 2.5
Where 10 is the total number of wars played , and 4 is the total number of wars per season ( there are rare cases where there are 5 , but we 'll take 4 ) .
2.5/4: 0.62
Where 2.5 is the previous result of dividing the number of total wars by the number of wars per season , and we divide this value by the total days of the clan war , which are 4 , we can round that value to 0.6 , or well , 0.62 ( I WOULD TAKE THE FIRST VALUE , ALTHOUGH YOU CAN OPT FOR BOTH ) .
Finally , we have to take into account the total number of wars that ended on the third day , for example , we think there are 3 .
10-0.25-0.25-0.25 = 9.25
Now, we divide the total medals by the value we got, for example: 27,550 / 9.25 = 2,978 AVG.