Moderator: Clan Directors

is that the way they do it? That is a horrible idea.MudPuppy wrote:Not that it's a huge deal but I don't like that the F400 is delayed from being posted in the clan forum in order for the newsletter to get an exclusive first showing of it. The results are now 10-days old and appear to have excluded at least 5 wars that were completed in May... presumably in order to meet the newsletter's submission deadline.
I'd prefer the results get posted here first whenever they're ready and that the newsletter then reports on it in their following issue. The newsletter is a great resource for a one-stop summary of various happenings in CC but for most everything else they simply report what's already been announced elsewhere... and I think that's the best approach. The resulting delays and omission of completed wars are more of a downside than any benefit the newsletter might gain for being able to report the results exclusively.

It's not based on # of wars, but by "weight". Clans slowly lose "weight" from previous results. So in order to stay on the chart you have to keep up with so many wars, etc. Once you've gained enough weight (150 pts) then you'll show up on the chart.crazy4catnip wrote:Just curious: How many wars must a new clan complete before being added to the F400 list?
(The Ulti-M8's completed their second war in May.)
-- crazy4catnip



Where's the frustration coming from, Gunn? We are appreciative. Thank you for keeping this ranking going.Gunn217 wrote:As I remember it, FD sometimes went 2 months or more between updates. So be appreciative that I update it every month. Frankly, the people that bitch about it in this thread makes me want to quit doing it.

Thanks!IcePack wrote: It's not based on # of wars, but by "weight". Clans slowly lose "weight" from previous results. So in order to stay on the chart you have to keep up with so many wars, etc. Once you've gained enough weight (150 pts) then you'll show up on the chart.
IcePack


I don't think he is asking for appreciation.... he is just annoyed that he puts in time and effort to get it done for us, just to have people criticise. He should get it though without asking. So many people do not realise how much time everything takes. Thankless task really.Dako wrote:It's lame to ask for appreciation. If you do it for appreciation - don't. If you don't do it for appreciation - don't ask for it.
Dako wrote:It's lame to ask for appreciation. If you do it for appreciation - don't. If you don't do it for appreciation - don't ask for it.


I'm sorry this came across so negatively, was only trying to be helpful. I appreciate the work you do on this Gunn, the rankings are a fun part of the Clan experience, very glad you picked them up after FD left.Swifte wrote:THOTA have magically re-appeared in the June rankings posted in the Newsletter.



I'm pretty sure this is not included in the latest ranking...betiko wrote:wow lhdd 8th! surprised they are that high mostly after losing their cc3 challenge vs iD.

I will start by saying im only repeating what ive been told, never seen the calculation but as I understand it....deantursx wrote:I also love this ranking...without it winning some wars would be meaningless. I don't really understand how its calculated though. Are the results of all wars put into the system equally waited, or would a 25-24 win count for a lot more than a 6-4? Also, does a clan lose less points when a war is really close, or is it simply a win/loss system?

