No, the issue i have with “scales” such as these is that it´s inconsistent.
In real life more factors are to be considered, like who do they work with?, trade partners?, military aid?, popular support?, (if so where and why?), what is a win?.
Im more into looking at one conflict at the time and analyze it properly. Then you can use these result in one conflict to comment other ones, but it can´t be used as the “truth”.
Then we get the same issues as we did with the Kosovo Bombings (wich are considered that the world community did “to much to fast”, as to opposed in the Yugoslavia war when it was considered doing “to little to late”)
The consequence is that Serbs in Kosovo has been forced to leave, Serbia was punished thought it was fighting a guerrilla campaign (which aimed at drawing NATO into the conflict, and deliberately broke a ceasefire to do so, successfully i might add)
Both sides in this conflict did some dumb shit, but hadn´t the memory/“experience” of the Yugoslavia war been used to exemplify the Serbs behavior the response had n´t been so harsh….
Iraq is another example when things go wrong because it´s not analyzed enought before action is taken.