metalgearyoda Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 torstatus's full/heavy definition is out of date. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorpienne Posted June 22, 2012 Author Share Posted June 22, 2012 torstatus's full/heavy definition is out of date. Can you please explain what you mean? I don't understand what you're trying to say. Paige Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leeoben Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 Obviosuly I have no hard data, but if I had to guess at this point based on the few numbers that have been shared my personal estimations would be something like this. Light ~ 0-1000 Standard ~ 1000-2000 Heavy ~ 2000-3000 Very heavy ~ 3000-4000 Full ~ 4000 These numbers could be way off, so please please please don't take them as fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnakeCL Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 Obviosuly I have no hard data, but if I had to guess at this point based on the few numbers that have been shared my personal estimations would be something like this. Light ~ 0-1000 Standard ~ 1000-2000 Heavy ~ 2000-3000 Very heavy ~ 3000-4000 Full ~ 4000 These numbers could be way off, so please please please don't take them as fact. Light I think is right on. Standard is around 1001-2500 I think. (pop actually changed while I was taking a census from standard to heavy) Which leaves heavy starting at 2501 and ending somewhere between 3500 and 3700. Looks like it might be closer to Light: 1000 Standard: 1001-2500 Heavy: 2501-3500 Very Heavy: 3501-? Is where I lose it, since I don't have a pop-change figure for Jedi Covenant.z This is, of course, unless each server has a different cap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorpienne Posted June 22, 2012 Author Share Posted June 22, 2012 OKay, worksheet updated with todays numbers... https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Aregkvys5QFodFJ2OWN5U0hwaVFBYWdqUUh1WmdZUFE#gid=36 You'll see THREE sheets with today's date. 1. 2012 06 22 is todays data done in the traditional style. 2. 2012 06 22 (Jeffstyle) is todays data done in the new way, which I'm really starting to think is the right way, but I can't switch over to only doing it this way because then I can't compare it to the old stuff. FML. I do not have time to regear the spreadsheet for doing it only this way and going back and analyzing the numbers. Bleh. 3. 2012 06 22 (HiPhi) is a short analysis of the 32 servers that have phi values above one. That excludes 185 servers AND potentially excludes a population of logins between 0 and 92,500 logins. 1. 2012 06 22 is todays data done in the traditional style. The numbers continue to shoot up! Showing up to 70,414 concurrent logins. The data is for the two-week period from 06/08-06/22. The bulk of the transfers occurred on 6/12/2012 through 6/18/2012. So starting next Tuesday ALL of the data will be post transfer. At that point, I'll switch to doing all the math as in #2. All population values aside, the grand total of change in the population is 7.5 ø. That's 0.03 ø on origin servers and 7.47 ø on destination servers. Keep in mind that the Fatman is 2.25 ø, so a change of 7.5 ø is a *lot* of logins. 2. 2012 06 22 (Jeffstyle) is todays data done in the new way. Again, the numbers are pretty similar. This shows an average of 66,554 logins. 3. 2012 06 22 (HiPhi) is a short analysis of the 32 servers that have phi values above one. Keep in mind that this excludes 185 servers AND potentially excludes a population of logins between 0 and 92,500 logins. ø >1 SERVERS BY AREA APAC 3 EUR English 6 EUR French 4 EUR German 4 US East 9 US West 6 Total 32 ø >1 SERVERS BY TYPE PvE 14 PvP 8 RP PvE 7 RP PvP 3 Total 32 ø >1 SERVERS BY TRANSFER STATUS Destination 27 Origin 5 Grand Total 32 I swear, that if anyone looks at this and is a chickenhead and goes "bawk bawk bawk TOR ONLY HAS 25k SUBSCRIBERS bawk bawk bawk" that I will make poultry jokes and references at you in a mocking way because you didn't read this. This is the number of LOGINS on ONLY 32 of 217 SERVERS. It is NOT SUBSCRIBERS. LOGINS BY AREA (32 ø >1 servers only) APAC 1,880 8% of total EUR English 4,522 18% of total EUR French 2,110 8% of total EUR German 2,600 10% of total US East 8,796 35% of total US West 4,923 20% of total Total 24,831 LOGINS BY TYPE (32 ø >1 servers only) PvE 11,755 47% of total PvP 7,306 29% of total RP PvE 4,310 17% of total RP PvP 1,460 6% of total Total 24,831 LOGINS BY TRANSFER STATUS (32 ø >1 servers only) Destination 23,191 93% of total Origin 1,640 7% of total Total 24,831 AVG LOGINS BY AREA (32 ø >1 servers only) APAC 627 EUR English 754 EUR French 528 EUR German 650 US East 977 US West 821 Grand Avg 776 AVG LOGINS BY TYPE (32 ø >1 servers only) PvE 840 PvP 913 RP PvE 616 RP PvP 487 Grand Avg 776 AVG LOGINS BY TRANSFER STATUS (32 ø >1 servers only) Destination 859 Origin 328 Grand Avg 776 The destination servers, as expected are still zooming up in average logins per server. CHANGE BY AREA (32 ø >1 servers only) APAC -0.03 ø EUR English 1.32 ø EUR French 0.7 ø EUR German 0.81 ø US East 2.17 ø US West 1.72 ø Grand Total 6.69 ø CHANGE BY TYPE (32 ø >1 servers only) PvE 3.21 ø PvP 2.25 ø RP PvE 1.21 ø RP PvP 0.02 ø Grand Total 6.69 ø CHANGE BY TRANSFER STATUS (32 ø >1 servers only) Destination 7.43 ø Origin -0.74 ø Grand Total 6.69 ø The Bastion, Prophecy of the Five, Tomb of Freedon Nadd, and The Ebon Hawk all show changes of > 0.5 ø. People are taking the transfer options in a BIG way. The Harbinger, The Shadowlands, Drooga's Pleasure Barge, Canderous Ordo, Jar'Kai Sword, The Red Eclipse, Mantle of the Force, Begeren Colony, Darth Nihilus, The Progenitor, Jung Ma, Corellian Run, Nightmare Lands, T3-M4, Vanjervalis Chain, and Battle Meditation are all seeing respectable growth of > 0.1 ø Ajunta Pall, The Swiftsure, and Lord Adraas are all dropping ø values around -0.2ø. These are all three relatively large origin servers, so that's to be expected. The Fatman, even though it's a destination server for a whole passle of other servers has one of the biggest pop declines at -0.39 ø. Paige Interesting stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorpienne Posted June 22, 2012 Author Share Posted June 22, 2012 This is, of course, unless each server has a different cap. Aaaand we have *no* real basis for knowing this. It's not only possible, but really likely. :-( I'm starting to think that I'll monitor my own server and discontinue this analysis next week. It's becoming too uncertain. The signal to noise ratio is just lousy at this point. The work we'd have to do to correlate pop to status is just overwhelming... Paige Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnakeCL Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 Aaaand we have *no* real basis for knowing this. It's not only possible, but really likely. :-( I'm starting to think that I'll monitor my own server and discontinue this analysis next week. It's becoming too uncertain. The signal to noise ratio is just lousy at this point. The work we'd have to do to correlate pop to status is just overwhelming... Paige Well, I think a few of the destination servers might share the same settings. Might take a few weeks, but I might be able to nail down a range for a few servers. At the moment though, it is looking like Fatman, Canderous Ordo, Shadowlands, and Jedi Covenant might share the same caps. I've managed to nail-down light, standard, and heavy for Jedi Covenant (I think) just need to refine that data a bit. Somebody needs to hit a "full" server during prime tonight and come up with a ccu figure so we can ballpark it at least. I apologize if I'm not as versed in math as yourself or some of the other people helping in this thread, LOL. I'm just good at logging into a server and quickly taking a survey is all. Just want to help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorpienne Posted June 22, 2012 Author Share Posted June 22, 2012 I apologize if I'm not as versed in math as yourself or some of the other people helping in this thread, LOL. I'm just good at logging into a server and quickly taking a survey is all. Just want to help. You have *nothing* to apologise for, and you are a saint for submitting surveys. :-) Thank you! Paige Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leeoben Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 I would certainly hope they dont have different caps, or thresholds for the different servers. While it is a possibility I would be very upset as a customer to know I picked a server because it said heavy and only had 2000 people when I could have picked the standard server that has 2500 because bioware decided it needed to have a bigger cap. As for you discontinuing the tracking, I can certainly understand your frustrations Paige. The uncertainty, and possible changing goal posts make it very difficult to get consistant numbers. If you do continue the thread I will certainly do my best to contribute and offer a different perspective when I can, and if you stop, I thank you for all the time and effort you put into this! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evironrage Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 I would certainly hope they dont have different caps, or thresholds for the different servers. While it is a possibility I would be very upset as a customer to know I picked a server because it said heavy and only had 2000 people when I could have picked the standard server that has 2500 because bioware decided it needed to have a bigger cap. As for you discontinuing the tracking, I can certainly understand your frustrations Paige. The uncertainty, and possible changing goal posts make it very difficult to get consistant numbers. If you do continue the thread I will certainly do my best to contribute and offer a different perspective when I can, and if you stop, I thank you for all the time and effort you put into this! It would seem counter intuitive to alter pop caps per type of server. I imagine BW went with a more streamed lined method of increasing caps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goretzu Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 Aaaand we have *no* real basis for knowing this. It's not only possible, but really likely. :-( I'd be surprised if destination servers had a different cap from each other, although it is quite possible destination servers would now have a different cap from all non-destination servers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrovesK Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 The Fatman, even though it's a destination server for a whole passle of other servers has one of the biggest pop declines at -0.39 ø. I'm going to go ahead and speculate that the Fatman's numbers are declining because of people that re-rolled on the Fatman to get a populated server prior to the server transfers going back to their original servers and transferring elsewhere (because their server went to a different destination than the Fatman). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malastare Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 I would certainly hope they dont have different caps, or thresholds for the different servers. While it is a possibility I would be very upset as a customer to know I picked a server because it said heavy and only had 2000 people when I could have picked the standard server that has 2500 because bioware decided it needed to have a bigger cap. You're (likely) thinking about it the wrong way. Everything that I've seen and heard leads me to believe that a "server" in SWTOR does not equate to just one hardware host. It seems far more likely that each "server" is a pool of hosts, and the size of that pool (or the raw capabilities of the pool) is expandable. There are still limits that are defined by software and infrastructure, but the number of supportable users is somewhat flexible. I work for a global internet service provider, and this is just standard operating procedure. Our clients don't get to know how large the storage partition they are sitting on, or what its maximum throughput is. We monitor that and adjust the service as needed for the demand. I would be shocked (and slightly worried) if The Fatman and Ebon Hawk were using the same type/amount of hardware that the ghost-town servers were. That's just silly. And if they have greater abilities to support users, then they should have higher caps. Yes, I understand that you want to pick a server based on population numbers. You should have known from the very start that the "fullness" words were relative measures and biased at best when trying to guess the full population of the server. The only reliable way to pick a server with a population you like is to create a character and see for yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fireswraith Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 It would nicer if along with light/standard/etc BioWare would also have a column that specifically says how many people are loged in. Mythic had the specific numbers on DAoC's homepage for each server, and listed when you log in also I think, it wouldn't be hard for BioWare to do the same thing; and it's not private trade secret information BioWare couldn't give us either, plays like to know these things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leeoben Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 It seems far more likely that each "server" is a pool of hosts, and the size of that pool (or the raw capabilities of the pool) is expandable. There are still limits that are defined by software and infrastructure, but the number of supportable users is somewhat flexible. I agree with you that the old definiton of server is probably long gone, but it still makes sense to me (my opinion as I do not work in large scale computer infrastructure) that they would allocate their resources equally. I may be misinterpretting what you were trying to say, but it seems to me if they could monitor and shift resources so easily that no servers would ever read as "full" since when one got close to the initial limit they could just pull resources from a currently light server to increase its capacity. If this was the case you would think their goal would be to keep all servers at a "standard" level when possible simply by moving the available resources. Now I would agree with you that the new destination servers having the same resources as the origin servers seems very unlikely. I'm sure moving some of those resources is where the new higher caps on destination servers are coming from, but again I would like to think they have done this evenly. If you are not going to do it evenly why have any other status besides open or full? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burtlebe Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 During launch and recently they have stated that they can and do adjust "server" capacity. Judging by the numbers on some of the servers that were transferred to other servers I would think they had to increase the caps for destinations. All i know is on the shadowlands there can be 300+ on imp and repub fleet and still have 140+ on drummond kaas. I think the numbers are alot higher atm than what people are estimating. Might be interesting to have guild members all got to a planet and everyone report the pops on each planet and add them up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorpienne Posted June 22, 2012 Author Share Posted June 22, 2012 Might be interesting to have guild members all got to a planet and everyone report the pops on each planet and add them up. I do that on a regular basis for my own server. You don't have to do it planet by planet. You can do it by level. LINK Paige Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnakeCL Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 Anyone who has editing privileged on the google doc, I mis-entered a figure for the latest "The Harbinger" data. (Einahr) I write everything down on a notepad as I run the queries, and for some reason when I was inputting it into the form, I added a 1 in front of 76. So instead of 176 for Gunslinger 50, it should just be 76. Anyway, after the quick census on The Harbinger at Full, it came in around 3708 users. It was also "full" but there was no queue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorpienne Posted June 23, 2012 Author Share Posted June 23, 2012 I am the only person with write privileges on that data sheet. I'll make the change. Thank you SO much for letting me know. A hundred people in the wrong place is would be really funny lookin in the analysis. :-) Paige Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KBSIP Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 entire thread is pointless, torstatus is notoriously unreliable. kindly refrain from posting these "average login" threads until you take the time to do manual checks of population numbers yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
misterME Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 entire thread is pointless, torstatus is notoriously unreliable. kindly refrain from posting these "average login" threads until you take the time to do manual checks of population numbers yourself. Wow. Nice way to undercut weeks' worth of work from these folks. If you're not interested in it (or more likely don't understand some of the higher-level mathematics used in the discussion), then you are free to go read something else. I heard tell that Archie comics are fun for boys of your age. Or would Oh, Babytroll, The Places We'll Burn!!! be more appropriate? Just so you know, TORStatus is used as a reference. The numbers they're using in the calculations are actually farmed from their own logs and submissions by people who actually want to help. Sheesh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorpienne Posted June 23, 2012 Author Share Posted June 23, 2012 (edited) entire thread is pointless, torstatus is notoriously unreliable. kindly refrain from posting these "average login" threads until you take the time to do manual checks of population numbers yourself. I know, it's a lot of text, but the original post has a *lot* of information about how someone did a bunch of sever censuses so they could be correlated to server status on torstatus. This guy went and did a *lot* of work. Basically, he wrote a program to tell him when a server changed status, and then he went and /whoed the population of the server to see what actual population number is associated with what status. http://inquisitive-myths.blogspot.com/2012/05/population-numbers-behind-server-status.html He estimates, with plenty of variability in the data, that: Light is up to about 500 Standard is up to about 1,500 Heavy is up to about 2,250-2,500(?) (Let's call this 2375 for now...) Very Heavy is up to about 3,000 Full is greater than about 3,000 Also, I have, and continue to do manual checks of server status, ably assisted by many other people who are happy to volunteer their time. SURVEY HERE RESULTS HERE Perhaps, sir you may consider "kindly refraining" from making snarky posts without reading the entire post you're commenting on? Furthermore, if you'd describe to me the ways in which torstatus is unreliable, I would appreciate it. I have found torstatus to be a completely reliable source of information about the average server load on a scale of 1 to 5 where light = 1 and full = 5 and presented as a two week average of data taken from the SWTOR server status page every 5 minutes and updated to their website every hour. I've never said torstatus does anything but that. Torstatus has never said torstatus does anything but that. If someone else claims that torstatus does anything but that, then I humbly suggest to you that they don't know what they're talking about. Paige Paige Edited June 23, 2012 by Scorpienne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeonBraun Posted June 24, 2012 Share Posted June 24, 2012 OP your math and data are either skewed, flawed, or just plain wrong. I haven't logged in once since server transfer day where The Fatman server was busier than The Harbinger server, and you have The Harbinger as the fifth busiest server. Now either you are taking data based on certain server's peak times and not basing that in comparison to other server's peak times, or something is simply off. Now, I have several servers and I have not noted The Fatman as the top server once since transfer day. And my main server now, The Harbinger has been extremely heavy to full each time I've logged in since transfer day, with a substantial queue time, and more than most. Not sure what is trying to be achieved with these numbers anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnakeCL Posted June 24, 2012 Share Posted June 24, 2012 Well, looking at Harbinger, it definitely has a lower cap. Much lower. Its registering full when Jedi Cov is skirting Heavy/Very Heavy territory. I'm currently trying to figure out the pop settings for each of the destination servers. Once we have that, torstatus's numbers are useful again, since they collect the status from each server. We'd just have to make sure we accounted for the difference in each server individually. But more work, but once we have the ranges for each server, its easy as pi ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorpienne Posted June 24, 2012 Author Share Posted June 24, 2012 OP your math and data are either skewed, flawed, or just plain wrong. I haven't logged in once since server transfer day where The Fatman server was busier than The Harbinger server, and you have The Harbinger as the fifth busiest server. Awesome. That's great to know. Please show me your data? This will expose a very serious difference in the servers and I'm very eager to see it. Now either you are taking data based on certain server's peak times and not basing that in comparison to other server's peak times, or something is simply off. Please re-read the original post, it's explained there. That is not *at all* what I'm doing. Now, I have several servers and I have not noted The Fatman as the top server once since transfer day. And my main server now, The Harbinger has been extremely heavy to full each time I've logged in since transfer day, with a substantial queue time, and more than most. Okay, that's good to know. Again, please with the data? I'd love to see your surveys or records of server status. Not sure what is trying to be achieved with these numbers anyway. First paragraph of real text after the list of servers in the OP. Paige Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts