Calculating the rating for clans!

The point is that the main idea of our "stone-crushing" competition with Iron, which spans 10 pages, is this: there is no single rating that takes all factors into account. There can't be, and there won't be. The participants in the game (the "rating" game, as an option) must agree among themselves which criteria will be significant and which will not. And calculate based on their agreements. Agree that height is very important for a basketball player, as it gives an advantage in the game. Therefore, hypothetically, you can calculate the rating of basketball teams based on the average height of the players on the team. The "taller" the team, the lower the coefficient they receive for a win (because it was easy for them to win)... :)

I'm exaggerating, although there is some reason in this. But the basketball association does not accept such amendments - here, height doesn't matter anyway - the main thing is to throw the ball into the basket more often. And let the team take care of selecting players. But the main thing is: there are always an equal number of participants on the court! Do you see the analogy? Strength and height are as they are, but the number is strictly defined.

That's how it should be with us. No one cares how many members of a Clan play in which version. The rating is only for those Clans that have a qualifying minimum number of players needed for the calculation (this is something they can agree on - you can not even set a minimum, if one player participates, the Clan rating is calculated based on him). But the maximum must be strictly limited... For example, three participants... Otherwise, there will be a huge imbalance... :)

Who needs a rating that is determined by the number of players in a Clan? Will the awareness of your gaming strength warm you up just because there are many of you? :) It won't warm me up, for example. By the way, I anticipate possible comments about the average level of all players in the Clan - this is also not a solution, because Clans will start getting rid of (or not accepting, as an option) potentially weak players. This will not lead to anything good. But a qualifying trio will be an incentive for any player in the Clan and will eliminate many possible complications in calculations and relationships. This is just a suggestion.

I am categorically against a fixed number of participants in the rating, how are you going to compare Clans with 18 people and 4?????

That's what I'm talking about. Based on this comment, there is nothing to compare at all. Where there are more players, they are stronger. Just list the Clans by number, starting with the largest in terms of membership - and there you have a ready-made rating... Why complicate things with calculations? That's why I suggest setting a limit. The three strongest - count. The rest - on the bench. The more players, the more chances to get a good qualifying trio in each tournament. But - without a guarantee that this will allow small Clans to compete on equal terms. Otherwise, is this even a rating?