asdf124
Well-Known Member
The increase wasn't just .dk, but also .SWE
The West EN Census
- Thread starter Clever Hans
- Start date
RaiderTr
Well-Known Member
Meanwhile.. even more perished in the last few months.
Also, as suspected, Montana is even worse than Las Vegas. I guess people finally got the memo and stopped starting over(?)
If I could, I would close (migrate) all "markets" to .Net and German.
Then close/merge/offer migration routes to some .Net ones. Maybe turn one into US-time zone one.
And/Or separate them for various play styles like we previously suggested. PvP server, PvE server, and whatnot.
RaiderTr
Well-Known Member
Maybe add a "Level 180" tab or somethin'
More usueful, if it's not too hard, would be "plus levels" -- the sum of levels in excess of 150.Maybe add a "Level 180" tab or somethin'
so, for example, on las vegas
1. 166; 2. 165; 3. 163; 4.163; 5. 160; 6. 159; 7. 159; 8. 157; 9. 156;
10. 156; 11. 156; 12. 156; 13. 155; 14. 155; 15. 154; 16. 154; 17. 154;
18. 153; 19. 153; 20. 152; 21. 152; 22. 151; 23. 151; 24. 151 25.150 ...
+Levels==16+15+13+13+10+9+9+7+6+6+6+6+5+5+4+4+4+3+3+2+2+1+1+1==151
asdf124
Well-Known Member
Or average level above 150?Maybe add a "Level 180" tab or somethin'
DeletedUser15368
A little tiny mini-census just to highlight some things until Han's next full one:
VS Jan 10.
VS Jan 10.
World Name | Number of lvl15+ accounts | Number of lvl150 accounts | Number of lvl180 accounts | Top ranked exp player |
Arizona | 874 (+15) | 507 (+4) | 57 | challenger-71 365,9M exp (lvl 202) |
Colorado | 1915 (+75) | 483 (-1) | 46 | benben7 410,6M exp (lvl 205) |
Las Vegas | 940 (-100) | 31 (+4) | - | chigra 75,6M exp (lvl 167) |
Montana | 1072 (-22) | 4 (+2) | - | rndm 36,4M exp (lvl 155) |
- Montana may have already peaked, and is in decline.
- Further continuation of the trend where the previous world is abandoned when a new world opens.
- The old fort worlds are still growing, even without migrations.
- We really need migrations from the dead worlds to Az, Co, or a new Migration World as an alternative to a new world though.
Last edited by a moderator:
panos-the-best
Well-Known Member
I really can't see how these numbers are being counted. How come Juarez appears to have 27.000 players?? The real number is about 1/100 of that.
About migration. We say the same things every month but we are not being heared.
DeletedUser15368
When you don't log into a world for a while, your character is deactivated, but still exists.
It means, at least, 26k accounts have been created on that world and subsequently abandoned. It doesn't include accounts that have been deleted, only the combined count of active and deactivated accounts. It's useful to see player retention which is probably why the page is hidden.
When we talk about potentially thousands of accounts being trapped on dead worlds, that could be migrated somewhere to give that character new life, a lot of that potential is hidden away in the deactivated players, including, I'm guessing, your friends, and mine, that have gone inactive and deactivated since fort builds and classes lost their competitiveness.
We've never really had a reply about it either, so we keep trying to get the attention of the people that need to ask about it.
Last edited by a moderator:
asdf124
Well-Known Member
It is interesting to see that it took a couple of months for montana to kill at least 2 worlds(kansas/las vegas)
While 470 new players joined colorado, only 80+ joined arizona.
Last edited:
the spoon
Member
This "number of players stat" for each world is something that you count every day or this detail appears somewhere in the official page of The-west.net ?A little tiny mini-census just to highlight some things until Han's next full one:
VS Jan 10.
- Montana may have already peaked, and is in decline.
- Further continuation of the trend where the previous world is abandoned when a new world opens.
- The old fort worlds are still growing, even without migrations.
- We really need migrations from the dead worlds to Az, Co, or a new Migration World as an alternative to a new world though.
DeletedUser15368
If you mean the table, it's just looking in the in-game rankings.
If you mean the thing in the spoiler, it's here.
Clever Hans
Well-Known Member
Stats on February 25th 2023 (vs previous count on January 10th)Worlds with Union:
| Number of lvl15+ accounts | Number of lvl150+ accs | Number of lvl180+ accs | Top ranked exp player | |||
Arizona | 883 (+24) | 505 (+2) | 82 | Challenger-71 369,3M (lvl 202) | |||
Briscoe | 418 (-20) | 264 (-11) | 39 | Doc Scurlock 292,7M (lvl 196) | |||
Colorado | 1925 (+85) | 487 (+3) | 49 | benben7 417,7M (lvl 206) | |||
Dakota | 420 (+11) | 232 (+10) | 12 | Johnny45s 315M (lvl 198) | |||
El Dorado | 348 (-22) | 208 (-3) | 15 | pghracer 234,7M (lvl 190) | |||
Fairbank | 536 (-4) | 327 (-5) | 21 | silverlady1 252M (lvl 192) | |||
Galveston | 252 (-12) | 103 (-3) | 2 | Breed Brabek 201M (lvl 186) | |||
Houston | 266 (-27) | 114 (-8) | 0 | Wicker24 134,3M (lvl 177) | |||
Idaho | 382 (-13) | 111 (-3) | 2 | Mary Jane Read 250M (lvl 191) |
Worlds without Union:
World Name | Number of lvl15+ accounts | Number of lvl150+ accs | Number of lvl180+ accs | Top ranked exp player |
Juarez | 456 (-13) | 62 (+10) | 1 | Luke Cow Walker 185,6M (lvl 184) |
Kansas | 679 (-28) | 55 (=) | 1 | Luke Cow Walker 150,7M (lvl 180) |
Las Vegas | 930 (-110) | 29 (+2) | 0 | chigra 77,4M (lvl 167) |
Montana | 1032 (-62) | 4 (+3) | 0 | rndm 38,8M (lvl 156) |
Clever Hans
Well-Known Member
Few conclusions from my side:
- There are no new players whatsoever, except for players from .DK and .SE that migrated recently (mostly to Arizona and Dakota it seems).
- Higher levels quit slower than the lower ones.
- Almost no players with 180+ post Fairbank.
- Montana seems to have already peaked and it´s losing players now.
- Colorado has the biggest player base by far, Arizona close second.
- Several inactive worlds that should definitely be merged or at least open for migrations (especially El Dorado, Galveston and Houston).
DeletedUser15368
I agree with pretty much all your observations, but I am sure we do get new players, they just don't hang around for long and get deactivated (as evidenced by the this page). Also I'll keep pointing out that Colorado is growing due to players coming from other servers, and making fresh accounts to play on the famous world that still has large battles.
Later this week I'm going to do a deep-dive into all 13 worlds fort battle and general activeness.
What I’d like to see (but haven’t found the time to tease out) is:
Regular FFRS over time by world.
Defined as how many players participated in 3 or more battles in a given week.
Even better would be if the players were grouped by the allyids of the digger and the fort owner (and “other)
Darkuletzz
Well-Known Member
Last edited:
darthmaul99174
Well-Known Member
Arizona would have dailies but the alliances are supremely unbalanced, if this can be fixed and not everyone joins the OP side (which would only take a few extra players, just 1 worlds migration could fix) It'd be beast. We get 120-150 players per battle.
Fwiw, if this new update is as effective as I hope it to be then we may be in a position where fully built forts can be attack/defense balanced with workable cap numbers (nominally in the range of 1.1:1 - 1.15:1).
Only so much can be done when the side-side balance is out of wack (that has to be worked out by the players, though we can help on the data analysis side and cap handicapping has shown some potential in limited testing). However, the beginner bonus together with the resistance changes should close the gap a bit between the high level veterans and the upstarts.
If battles stabilize on Colorado and/or Montana with fully built forts supporting caps in the desired range then I will request community polls for bringing those caps to worlds where filling smalls on a regular basis is plausible.
Only so much can be done when the side-side balance is out of wack (that has to be worked out by the players, though we can help on the data analysis side and cap handicapping has shown some potential in limited testing). However, the beginner bonus together with the resistance changes should close the gap a bit between the high level veterans and the upstarts.
If battles stabilize on Colorado and/or Montana with fully built forts supporting caps in the desired range then I will request community polls for bringing those caps to worlds where filling smalls on a regular basis is plausible.
For Arizona, the most viable option would probably be to employ join restrictions that restrict “freelancers” to the non-OP side of battles.
This is obviously highly controversial and would require an overwhelming vote of support that I don’t believe would be forthcoming.
However, if/when Colorado and Montana begin to see more regular competitive battles in fully built forts with reasonable caps, I can explore some limited special event battles that demonstrate this potential on other worlds.