How would you rank alliances based on publically available (ie no spyop required) information?

Any of the hit stats (including nw's avg nw's tnw's at time of hits for example) can be used, all scores stats can be used. And somehow come up with a score that is usable, and provides a good ranking.

Things that need to be taken into consideration: A late-FS on a fat no-def alliance would lead to large civ counts and good HPK, but does not in anyway show good attacking ability; an early FS by one warring alliance on another should be rewarded despite the fact that the civ counts & networths would be low etc; and a high HPK does not necessarily mean that you're not good at warring, it can simply imply that your opponent is good at stonewalling; or it could indicate that you don't know what you're doing.


So, put your thinking caps on and give me some ideas ;) Even a nice starting point would be useful. Feel free to use the last few sets of data (in boxcar or elsewheres) to test your scoring algorithm.


Basically I'm looking for an alternative to ANW / TNW rankings for warring members that is actually accurate in describing warring ability & effort.