cairnswk wrote:mibi wrote:I like the stats, but I think a better gauge is the total number of pages of active games. Even more accurate would be the total number of active games, not pages, although I know that may be too time consuming to count.
If they are ranked by active games, that will help the fact that older maps obviously have more games since they have been around long, it skews the relevant stats in my opinion.
And they should be ranked by total pages or total games, not movement, although movement should be listed. Also you have positive and negative movement mixed in, +6 is next to -6, this doesn't make much sense as they should be on the opposite ends of the spectrum..
I think the stats would be more useful that way.
Mibi...you're welcome to compile them your way then.
Mibi...sorry but i'm very short at the mo....
the purpose of these stats was simply to see how many pages of games were played over a week/fortnight for each map.
Yes it would be nice to have the total number of games for each map, but this is simply a case of multipying each page x 100 for everything but the last page and then (time consumingly) counting the number of games on the last page.
I have always stated only measuring active games does not show a true indication of the number of games that get played on a map because of the fact that between stat periods, some games will start and end, and therefore never get included in the overall big picture if you are only counting active games.
Doing another stats division/breakdown of + or - games is simply showing movement in another fashion, that has to be calculated according to the previous periods movement. That for me is too much extra time calculation that somebody else can do if they like.
But for now it seems that some people do use this, so i will continue to compile these.
Next issue 18/11.