Population Estimates for the Top 20 US Servers

[Johbor]

Very depressing, my server was full with ques at launch, at 6th place a month before 1.2, 16th place 2 weeks ago, now its not even in the top 20. But im sure some fanboy will point out that its somehow my fault.

 

I told you to stop with the momma jokes but you didnt listen.

[MajikMyst]

So?? Going by the OP's post?? Over half of my servers population is in my guild?? Wow?? I wonder if all the other guilds on my server that are bigger than mine know that?? Wait?? That means the imperials don't exist on my server??

 

Bottom line is the OP's post is not accurate in the slightest.. Not even close.. There are 1.3 million players in this game.. Do the math..

[Scorpienne]

So?? Going by the OP's post?? Over half of my servers population is in my guild?? Wow?? I wonder if all the other guilds on my server that are bigger than mine know that?? Wait?? That means the imperials don't exist on my server??

 

Bottom line is the OP's post is not accurate in the slightest.. Not even close.. There are 1.3 million players in this game.. Do the math..

 

I think maybe you didn't read the whole post, where it says that the numbers are the two week average number of players actively logged in at once, or where it says that the actual number of players on the server at peak hours may be several times that many players, or where it says that these numbers represent some small fraction of the total number of subscriptions...

 

I'll just PM you a copy of the meat of the post.

 

If you have find a logical error in the analysis, then I'd love to know about it. If you'll read the post, you'll see where I got my data, that it's posted publicly for everyone to look at and analyze as they see fit so they can improve the analysis.

 

Paige

[MajikMyst]

I think maybe you didn't read the whole post, where it says that the numbers are the two week average number of players actively logged in at once, or where it says that the actual number of players on the server at peak hours may be several times that many players, or where it says that these numbers represent some small fraction of the total number of subscriptions...

 

I'll just PM you a copy of the meat of the post.

 

If you have find a logical error in the analysis, then I'd love to know about it. If you'll read the post, you'll see where I got my data, that it's posted publicly for everyone to look at and analyze as they see fit so they can improve the analysis.

 

Paige

 

I did read the entire post.. Your math and your post is flawed.. Server capacity has already been doubled since the launch of the game.. You are also not accounting for the simple fact that there are 1.3 million players to account for.. With your numbers, that simply isn't possible.. You show the lowest of the top 20 in the U.S. with a mere 300 and something players.. That means all the rest have less than that.. Again, do the math.. The numbers just aren't there.. Sorry..

 

As I said in my first post.. Your not accounting for the increase in server capacity that is already there.. There is your error.. Your estimates are simply incorrect.. A server can appear as lite and have over 2k players in it.. Again, you are not adjusting for increased capacity.. Nor are you accounting for the total known players to be in the game.. Any estimate you come up with is incorrect unless you account for all the players..

 

In the simplest of terms.. Any estimate you attempt to do on server population must over all add up to the single known variable we know of.. Total game population or 1.3 million..

 

P.S. Thanks for the PM.. I would prefer to talk about it here..

Edited May 27, 2012 by MajikMyst

[erictlewis]

I did read the entire post.. Your math and your post is flawed.. Server capacity has already been doubled since the launch of the game.. You are also not accounting for the simple fact that there are 1.3 million players to account for.. With your numbers, that simply isn't possible.. You show the lowest of the top 20 in the U.S. with a mere 300 and something players.. That means all the rest have less than that.. Again, do the math.. The numbers just aren't there.. Sorry..

 

As I said in my first post.. Your not accounting for the increase in server capacity that is already there.. There is your error.. Your estimates are simply incorrect.. A server can appear as lite and have over 2k players in it.. Again, you are not adjusting for increased capacity.. Nor are you accounting for the total known players to be in the game.. Any estimate you come up with is incorrect unless you account for all the players..

 

In the simplest of terms.. Any estimate you attempt to do on server population must over all add up to the single known variable we know of.. Total game population or 1.3 million..

 

P.S. Thanks for the PM.. I would prefer to talk about it here..

 

I call bs on that post the thread where they double the cap, they are talking about it, but not yet done it. All I have to do is log in and look at 2 heavy 8 standard and the rest are light all the time now to realize we got folks spread way to thin.

[Scorpienne]

I think the biggest communication gap is that I haven't communicated clearly what I'm doing.

 

I'm estimating the number of people logged in and actively playing the game on average over the last two weeks.

 

I am NOT counting the number of subscribers. I don't have that information.

 

\You are also not accounting for the simple fact that there are 1.3 million players to account for.. With your numbers, that simply isn't possible.. You show the lowest of the top 20 in the U.S. with a mere 300 and something players.. That means all the rest have less than that.. Again, do the math.. The numbers just aren't there.. Sorry..

 

Look, let's say that a server has 500 people logged in at 1:00 in the afternoon. These are mostly stay at home parents, people out of work, and kids out of school. Lets say that there are 1500 people logged in at 12:00 midnight. These are the working folks, 3rd shifters, and single folks. Two completely different groups of people! Two completely different sets of subscriptions. My math averages the two and says that there are 1000 people logged in on average. In this example though, that underestimates the number of SUBSCRIBERS by 1000 (because that's 2000 subscribers).

 

My numbers are just the number of people logged in *NOT* the number of subscribers, which is ostensibly 1.3 million. What my numbers are saying is that only about 5% of the worldwide population of 1.3 million are logged in at one time, on average, in the past two weeks. I have no way in the world to talk about subscriber numbers. Only EA/BW has that kind of info. I'm just estimating the number of *people logged in*. Do you see the difference?

 

As I said in my first post.. Your not accounting for the increase in server capacity that is already there.. There is your error.. Your estimates are simply incorrect.. A server can appear as lite and have over 2k players in it..

 

Show me. Find me a server at light capacity that has 2000 people on it. I will /who the server by level band and actually count the number of logged in characters and record it. If this is true, it's amazing. i'd love to have proof of it.

 

 

Nor are you accounting for the total known players to be in the game.. Any estimate you come up with is incorrect unless you account for all the players.. In the simplest of terms.. Any estimate you attempt to do on server population must over all add up to the single known variable we know of.. Total game population or 1.3 million..

 

See, this is where it's clear we're not communicating. I can't count the number of total known players. That information is in some accounting server somewhere. All I can do take the information about server loads and estimate how many people are logged in.

 

 

Paige

Edited May 27, 2012 by Scorpienne

[dandamanno]

I think the biggest communication gap is that I haven't communicated clearly what I'm doing.

 

No Scorpienne, you have communicated it perfectly, several times. Some people just don't understand the math, misread, or don't bother to read your whole posts.

 

You are far more patient than I would be with some of the people responding on this thread.

 

In the simplest of terms.. Any estimate you attempt to do on server population must over all add up to the single known variable we know of.. Total game population or 1.3 million..

 

In the simplest of terms, the 1.3 million subscribers are not logged in all the time. Many may not even be playing anymore. You could have a game with 100 million subs and if no one plays the game you will have a population of zero online. We are measuring population number here not sub numbers.

[PoeticRex]

I have been saying this for months there is in no way 1.3 million active players. Subs run out, active players keep a mmo thriving and this game is on the verge of a total meltdown.

[sabreene]

I have been /who-ing my server (Bergeren Colony) which is light most of the time, with maybe a few forays into standard. Still, we make it into the top 20 US. At low tide ( the wee hours of the morning, say 4am or so), we have less than 100 people playing. Last night's count: 63 Republic side and 38 Imperial side.

 

At high tide just last week it was about 750 +/-, and that took it to standard. The past day it hasn't reached standard, but we have been the first server listed after the standards. The highest number of people I've /who-ed (given 50 people could come on right after I sign off!) has been 596 (total, rep/imps)

 

Just now we are still at 'light', and right below the last 'standard'. I'm not sure ordering the servers like this actually works, but it *appears* to. I've been ordering it by population and then randomly testing the populations to see if the were indeed in order. They seem to be. Anyway, with Light at 1:40pm on a Sunday holiday weekend (west coast server & time) we have 170 (1-49's) and 69 (50's) Republic side, along with 169 (1-49's) and 41 (50's) Imperial side.

 

I haven't had the chance to hard test the theory, but I think had we gone over into 600+ people, we would've changed to "standard".

 

I've started to enter my /who counts in the server population chart --- I think that was a wonderful idea!!

 

To the OP -- great thread and wonderful work on your math! I'm another person that loves data. It's interesting!!

 

(And on a totally bias server plug -- Begeren Colony is great! RP-PVE west coast server, where the Republic pop is slightly heavier than the Imperial pop and the people are nice! I hope people re-roll there!)

[maxetius]

29 pages of not biased at all rage. what fun, yet solves nothing.

[Greenclaw]

1.3 million subscribers because they gave away free time to boost their numbers. I would be really surprised if more than 200,000 people log in on the regular. There really is no point to. It is dead everywhere except for a handful of servers.

 

It's a shame too. I wasted 6 months here when I coulda left after 3, did nothing for the last 3 months and I know most other decent gamers feel the same way.

 

Diablo 3 is just as big a disappointment. I really feel that the days of making good games are done and the age of making the cheapest and easiest games to sell is here. I really find it hard to believe they spent 200 million. I think that is a lie in itself to make us buy the game.

 

If they spent 200 million they are really stupid people running EA and Bioware. All I got to say for real.

[MajikMyst]

In the simplest of terms, the 1.3 million subscribers are not logged in all the time. Many may not even be playing anymore. You could have a game with 100 million subs and if no one plays the game you will have a population of zero online. We are measuring population number here not sub numbers.

 

In the simplest of terms.. I see no reason to calculate the average number of poeple playing.. The number of subs is the golden number that will determine if this game is a success or not.. The number of subs is the income this game generates..

 

I do understand now what he is measuring.. I don't understand why.. No it isn't clear in his OP.. I have read through about 6 times now, trying to understand why and for what purpose..

 

Buy the OP's numbers less than 1% of the people that are subscribed actually play this game.. Again, using his average of 72,203 total average players world wide.. That to me is simply to low.. Possible.. But way to low..

 

Even the title of this thread is misleading.. Population estimates.. Not active player estimates.. So no.. It isn't communicated well.. Sorry..

 

Patience will get you far.. You should practice some..

 

Paige

 

I do not know the capacity of our servers.. I do know that Bioware has already stated that the capacity has been doubled and will be doubled again when 1.3 is released.. This has been posted a number of times on these forums.. I do think your average is a bit low because again, I don't feel you are accounting for the first server capacity increase.. I feel that you are using an estimate of server capacity at launch.. If that is the case then your estimates are a bit low.. Which I feel is an accurate statement..

Edited May 27, 2012 by MajikMyst

[AshlaBoga]

I'm actually surprised by Fatman, I thought it had more 3k, not 2k - but then again IT is NOT my forte.

[Clawrod]

this is a screenshot taken last friday at 9pm. EU server Chuundar

[MajikMyst]

The problem with the averages game is that it is next to impossible to get any kind of meaningful picture..

 

Someone takes a week off from the game due to personal reasons is not counted, even though they may be still an active player..

 

In the simplest of terms if they are continuing to pay for their subscription, then they are an active player.. Why they are not playing on any given day is their business.. Attempting to make any statement by using the average number of players on a given day is meaningless at best.. It is just a snap shot of a very sort period of time.. You can't account for people that are just working a lot of over time.. Finals are comming up for most colleges, they may be doing a ton of homework.. Last week was graduation week for a lot of people, again that would totally skew the numbers of the OP because that isn't considered.. Hence the issue of averages.. The OP has no accounting for life.. Why some people may be playing and others not..

 

There is no perfect week to take this kind of sampling.. This weekend is a holiday weekend.. For some it will not effect play time.. For others it will.. Who is active and who isn't??

 

In the simplest of terms, the only number you should work in is TOTAL population per server.. That would be nice for the players.. I am sure Bioware will never release that info.. Other than that.. TOTAL number of subscriptions.. Again Bioware is not going to release that.. Anything else is essentially speculation and not very usefull..

[MajikMyst]

this is a screenshot taken last friday at 9pm. EU server Chuundar

 

That is just one faction, and yes we all know that the EU servers are kinda pathetic.. Not sure why either..

[Clawrod]

i believe the data is not from a specific day at a specific time, its a general overlook over active accounts not players on line at a given time. also it is inaccurate because although most of my guild mates have active accounts (due to the free 30 days) they haven't loged in for weeks and to be honest i dont think they will.

Like them i believe many ppl are in the same situation.

[Kiyoko-]

The problem with the averages game is that it is next to impossible to get any kind of meaningful picture..

...

In the simplest of terms, the only number you should work in is TOTAL population per server.. That would be nice for the players.. I am sure Bioware will never release that info.. Other than that.. TOTAL number of subscriptions.. Again Bioware is not going to release that.. Anything else is essentially speculation and not very usefull..

 

In the simplest terms, the number of people actually playing impacts us in ways that the number of subscribers does not. Both numbers are of interest, not just subscribers. The average number of people actually playing is interesting to know. It does hint to us how many people are really playing, and how many (or few) you might actually encounter while playing.

 

It quantifies how bleak the situation has become.

 

Total number of subscribers is nice, but probably more important to the company and investors than us (except indirectly in terms of the game's profitability and so viability).

 

Anyway, if the average number of people playing is not of interest to you, fortunately no one is forcing you to read this thread. It doesn't invalidate it for the rest of us.

 

(As a side note, why do you end all sentences with two periods - to look unique?)

 

To the OP, thank you for all your work! This has been a fascinating thread.

[Kaddie]

In the simplest of terms.. I see no reason to calculate the average number of poeple playing.. The number of subs is the golden number that will determine if this game is a success or not.. The number of subs is the income this game generates..

 

I do understand now what he is measuring.. I don't understand why.. No it isn't clear in his OP.. I have read through about 6 times now, trying to understand why and for what purpose..

 

When you go to the cinema, what do you want to watch ? A good movie that you actually enjoy ? Or a crappy movie which will get a great financial success ?

 

People these days... /facepalm

Edited May 27, 2012 by Kaddie

[MajikMyst]

When you go to the cinema, what do you want to watch ? A good movie that you actually enjoy ? Or a crappy movie which will get a great financial success ?

 

People these days... /facepalm

 

And the point there is?? /facepalm

 

The financial success of a movie is of no bearing on whether or not I will watch it.. I watch it because I want to be entertained..

 

People these days..

[Kaddie]

And the point there is?? /facepalm

 

The financial success of a movie is of no bearing on whether or not I will watch it.. I watch it because I want to be entertained..

 

People these days..

 

Gosh... Only proving what i want you to understand.

 

So why talking about subscription numbers ? We as players dont care about those ****** numbers, all we care is how many players are there in game.

 

It was an easy one, i'm sure you coul have handled that on your own.

Edited May 27, 2012 by Kaddie

[Dosvidaniya]

In the simplest of terms.. I see no reason to calculate the average number of poeple playing.. The number of subs is the golden number that will determine if this game is a success or not.. The number of subs is the income this game generates..

 

This is the reason you don't understand Paige or the math. You are trying to force the numbers to be something they aren't. Paige has explained it insanely clearly. It's the number of people playing on average on your server. Paige didn't state a conclusion because there isn't one. It's just data. You understand this. You clearly state it in the post. Yet, you continue to fall right back into strange claims about the math because you are still trying to warp the data into some claim about subscriptions.

 

As for the math errors, you haven't proven any of them. Using BW's subscription claims and haphazard guessing, the numbers do line up. If we assume that all subscribers play 80 minutes every day (9 hours and 20 minutes a week), the numbers tell us that there are 1.3 million subscribers. Of course the assumptions in the OP and the 80 minute assumption are incorrect. However, they do ballpark into a reasonable amount.

 

If you want to run the polls and then do the math to make it more accurate, Paige would love it. I'd be interested too. Just remember what these numbers are telling you and stop trying to force them into a subscription claim. If someone uses these numbers to tell you that subs are down, you are going to need to argue about the average play time. That is a valid argument. Though you'll need to use some real math or you'll both be spitting in the wind because no one will have evidence of anything. If you can't see the point behind these numbers, there is no point in being here since you'll just warp the data to fit your own paradigm.

Edited May 27, 2012 by Dosvidaniya

[ZudetGambeous]

In the simplest of terms.. I see no reason to calculate the average number of poeple playing.. The number of subs is the golden number that will determine if this game is a success or not.. The number of subs is the income this game generates..

 

I do understand now what he is measuring.. I don't understand why.. No it isn't clear in his OP.. I have read through about 6 times now, trying to understand why and for what purpose..

 

Buy the OP's numbers less than 1% of the people that are subscribed actually play this game.. Again, using his average of 72,203 total average players world wide.. That to me is simply to low.. Possible.. But way to low..

 

Even the title of this thread is misleading.. Population estimates.. Not active player estimates.. So no.. It isn't communicated well.. Sorry..

 

Patience will get you far.. You should practice some..

 

Paige

 

I do not know the capacity of our servers.. I do know that Bioware has already stated that the capacity has been doubled and will be doubled again when 1.3 is released.. This has been posted a number of times on these forums.. I do think your average is a bit low because again, I don't feel you are accounting for the first server capacity increase.. I feel that you are using an estimate of server capacity at launch.. If that is the case then your estimates are a bit low.. Which I feel is an accurate statement..

 

Because why should I care how many "subscribers" there are? If there are only 200 people actually playing the game then it doesn't really matter if there are 100,000,000 subscribers because that won't help me get a group or play a PvP match.

 

The only number that matters to people playing the game are the number of active players on a server.

 

Even the #1 server has only around 2000 which is 1000 per faction, which is really not that many when you consider the number of level ranges and activities and planets there are. It makes the world feel very empty, which is the the problem most people have with the game.

[Scorpienne]

I do understand now what he is measuring.. I don't understand why.. No it isn't clear in his OP.. I have read through about 6 times now, trying to understand why and for what purpose..

 

Whew! Okay, easy one. I got this one! :-D This is from my OP:

 

My guild, and the guildleaders on my server, have been wondering what is going to happen when server transfers go live. How many people are on which servers? Where are they likely to go? Are we likely to have an increase or decrease in population? Should we move someplace else? I started doing some math at this problem in order to try to get more information so we could plan accordingly.

 

I'm doing this exercise to identify the actual logged-in population size of the RP servers to see which end of a potential server merger and/or transfer and/or who knows what my server might be on. Since it's all in a spreadsheet, it's easy enough to do it for ALL of the servers, so I did it also as a public service in case anyone else might find this interesting or useful.

 

The problem with the averages game is that it is next to impossible to get any kind of meaningful picture

 

Well, I've been poking at numbers for a month or so. Additionally, the torstatus values are 2 week averages, so that sort of damps down on the variability and gives you an average that incorporates people's habits over those two weeks. So, I think that the torstatus 2 week average, while certainly not ideal, is the easiest way to do this right now. The best way is to /who a server's population maybe every hour from 17:00 to 00:00 in both factions and the 50s by class. I don't have the time to do that. :-( Sadly. I wish I was computery enough to make a program do that for me. Regardless, I think I'll continue using the torstatus 2 week averages. As long as you have a good grip on what they DO tell you so you can use the results of the analysis responsibly, then I think we're okay.

 

 

In the simplest of terms, the only number you should work in is TOTAL population per server..

 

The total number of people on the server is maybe the only meaniingful number to YOU but I don't like it one bit. If it's useful to you, then great. Carry on, sir, carry on. I think I'll continue to do my things my way. To each their own, right?

 

So why talking about subscription numbers ? We as players dont care about those ****** numbers, all we care is how many players are there in game.

 

 

Because why should I care how many "subscribers" there are? If there are only 200 people actually playing the game then it doesn't really matter if there are 100,000,000 subscribers because that won't help me get a group or play a PvP match.

 

 

I'm kinda with these guys. :-) I don't really care about subscriber numbers too much. I hope there are enough subscriber numbers to support the game and for BW/EA to make a fair and appropriate profit and for there to be sufficient biomasss to have a good online presence. That's sort of nebulous. What matters to me is who's gonna buy my auctions and who's gonna group with me for heroics, flashpionts and warzones.

 

If you want to run the polls and then do the math to make it more accurate, Paige would love it.

(Plus you used the word paradigm, it's one of my favorites!)

 

Heck yes Paige would love it! :-D More data is only good.

 

 

Patience will get you far.. You should practice some.

 

Belive me, I'm trying very hard to be patient. Very hard.

 

 

 

Paige

Edited May 28, 2012 by Scorpienne

[dandamanno]

In the simplest of terms.. I see no reason to calculate the average number of poeple playing.. ..

 

I can think of at least one. It shows what servers are thriving and which servers are dying, important information when choosing a server to play on.

 

Buy the OP's numbers less than 1% of the people that are subscribed actually play this game.. Again, using his average of 72,203 total average players world wide.. That to me is simply to low.. Possible.. But way to low.. ..

 

72,203/1300000=5.5%? Not sure where you get the "less than 1%" from. All the data shows is that on average 5.5% of active subs are actually logged on at any point. Sometimes it will be higher (at peak times), sometimes lower. You say you understand this now but I still think you are struggling a bit...

 

Even the title of this thread is misleading.. Population estimates.. Not active player estimates.. So no.. It isn't communicated well.. Sorry..

 

But he is estimating the average online populations. He never said "Subscription estimates", which is what you initially thought he was talking about. Anyway, I understood it immediately, and I don't think I am alone there...

 

Patience will get you far.. You should practice some..

Scorpienne has had to reexplain his original post about 10 times throughout the thread. I still think that he/she has more patience than I would in his situation. Thanks for the advice.

 

 

I do not know the capacity of our servers.. I do know that Bioware has already stated that the capacity has been doubled and will be doubled again when 1.3 is released.. This has been posted a number of times on these forums.. I do think your average is a bit low because again, I don't feel you are accounting for the first server capacity increase.. I feel that you are using an estimate of server capacity at launch.. If that is the case then your estimates are a bit low.. Which I feel is an accurate statement..

 

In the original post Scorpienne showed how they came to the server capacity numbers. They logged in when the servers were showing the "light", "standard"..."full" terms and counted the number of people on the server. It's pretty straight forward and gives a good estimate of server capacity when "full" is showing.