The West EN Census

[Harriet Oleson]

Wouldn't it be more relevant to divide the number of flowers per the number of players ? Cause of course if you compare flowers gathered in a world of 3300 toons with the amount gathered in a world with only 1000 toons, the second one will be much lower than the first one ... I think an average value of flowers per toon could indicate a bit more the "health" of each world : if the average is low, that means there are a lot of not so active/fully inactive accounts in this world. If I'm not mistaken, with the datas you gave :

Arizona; 95 000 000/961 = 98 855 flowers/toon
Briscoe; 37 400 000/452 = 82 743 flowers/toon
Colorado: 194 500 000/3313 = 58 708
Dakota: 36 500 000/461 = 79 175
El Dorado: 28 900 000/344 = 84 012
Fairbanks: 49 500 000/539 = 91 837
Galv; 8 800 000/160 = 55 000
Idaho; 25 900 000/359 = 72 145
Juarez: 37 400 000/485 = 77 113
Kansas 31 400 000/615 = 51 057
Las Vegas 37 900 000/709 = 53 456
Montana 47 300 000/996 = 47 490
Navajo 98 300 000/1780 = 55 225

Surprisingly Colorado is far from being first. That's a bit worrysome for the most populated world of the game, especially knowing battles there bring much more flowers than in other worlds (per thousands) which is supposed to make it easier to gather flowers there. But the number of accounts is suspicious : in the last census, there were only 1671 accounts level >40, and here there are 3313 accounts (all level together) ... Seems like there's an abnormally high amount of low level toons in Colorado; either lots of players try to play there and give up prematuraly (don't know why) either there's a huge amount of multis. In any case that's not normal to have near half of the toons in the world level < 40.

Seems like on the contrary Arizona and Fairbanks were the most active worlds on average. And Montana and Kansas were the lamest ones.
Of course these are only average values : personally I play in Kansas and I gathered 225k flowers. I guess there are really a lot of inactive accounts in Kansas to have an average value at only 51k/player. That's really super low.

 

[JWillow]

Wouldn't it be more relevant to divide the number of flowers per the number of players ? Cause of course if you compare flowers gathered in a world of 3300 toons with the amount gathered in a world with only 1000 toons, the second one will be much lower than the first one ... I think an average value of flowers per toon could indicate a bit more the "health" of each world : if the average is low, that means there are a lot of not so active/fully inactive accounts in this world. If I'm not mistaken, with the datas you gave :



Surprisingly Colorado is far from being first. That's a bit worrysome for the most populated world of the game, especially knowing battles there bring much more flowers than in other worlds (per thousands) which is supposed to make it easier to gather flowers there. But the number of accounts is suspicious : in the last census, there were only 1671 accounts level >40, and here there are 3313 accounts (all level together) ... Seems like there's an abnormally high amount of low level toons in Colorado; either lots of players try to play there and give up prematuraly (don't know why) either there's a huge amount of multis. In any case that's not normal to have near half of the toons in the world level < 40.

The more active worlds typically have the highest number of multis. That is why dividing by number of toons is misleading, as many multis just collect enough flowers to open the card game and some stick around to farm while there, DOTD/new world/lucille quest sees highest number of fake accounts being made. Usually after christmas sale most will be gone, I am guessing because the people behind the multi accounts don't keep track of past ones and instead just automatically makes new ones for each event.

Dead worlds seem to have better counts because there is no real reason for a person to make a multi, so it is actual normal activity, think my average on dead worlds was 190k flowers compared to over 300k on Colorado(I didn't even get as many flowers on Beta even though it was a week longer, 250k there).

Yes some multis are caught but I have feeling only drop in the bucket amount, Especially with an example of a player getting two toons banned for multi accounts and yet already has a new one created, so it is a never ending stream on active worlds.

 

[Bob Baumeister]

Surprisingly Colorado is far from being first.

I am not saying that I would have predicted it, but if you think about it it is not that surprising.
Colorado is the world that is advertises a lot as being _the world_ to play. So there surely is a higher amount of people that just have a look and then leave again than on other worlds.
And for a similar reason many people there might log in to have their fort fight, or a bunch of duells, and that's it.

 

[Thanatoss]

There are people with 30-40 fake accounts on Colorado

 

[Killer Bonnie]

How many fort battles on worlds? Is it possible to get an updated census also?

 

[Harsha..]

New stats 21/11/23 (previous report 28/08/23)

World Name	Flowers (Million)	Number of lvl40+ accounts	Flowers per level 40+ account	Number of lvl150+ accs	Number of lvl180+ accs	Top ranked exp player
Arizona	95	849 (-13)	112000	560 (+12)	195 (+29)	Challenger-71 490.2M (lvl 211)
Briscoe	37.4	385 (-2)	97000	266 (+9)	104 (+10)	Doc Scurlock 365.4M (lvl 202)
Colorado	194.5	1759 (+88)	110600	510 (+12)	147 (+28)	benben7 570.8M (lvl 216)
Dakota	36.5	411 (+1)	88800	238 (=)	56 (+13)	Johnny45s 420.7M (lvl 203)
El Dorado	28.9	293 (-17)	98600	193 (-5)	48 (+7)	pghracer 318.5M (lvl 198)
Fairbank	49.5	491 (-17)	101000	319 (-8)	71 (+17)	silverlady1 341.1M (lvl 200)
Galveston registration closed	8.8	139 (-31)	63309	54 (-8)	4 (+1)	Elvis. 275.4M (lvl 194)
Idaho	25.9	315 (-10)	82000	121 (+2)	13 (+1)	Mary Jane Read 361.1M (lvl 201)
Juarez	37.4	399 (-20)	93700	123 (+15)	4 (+1)	Luke Cow Walker 284.8M (lvl 195)
Kansas	31.4	474 (-39)	66000	77 (+15)	1 (=)	Luke Cow Walker 241.2M (lvl 191)
Las Vegas	37.9	528 (-59)	72000	26 (-3)	1 (+1)	chigra 152.8M (lvl 180)
Montana	47.3	609 (-25)	77700	22 (+6)	0 (=)	Aivos 108.7M (lvl 173)
Navajo	98.3	491	200200	0	0	Aivos 85.9M (lvl 139)

Keeping the flowers collected per level 40+ toon gives us this result for per world activity, which I believe is the more accurate results everyone was looking for. Colorado likely has a greater number of L40+ accounts that aren't active and simply play the card games. But it does give us a fairly good idea on player activity in all worlds in general.



@Harriet Oleson a picture is worth a thousand words, so here's one -



Literally 707 level 1 greenhorns are in the starting spot in Colorado. So as others pointed out taking the total player numbers is certaintly not accurate. So, I did this census to get a better comparsion.

 

[darthmaul99174]

Not sure if I am in the minority with this or not but I didn't need the flowers on colorado or arizona and I didn't feel like struggling to collect them so didn't try for flowers on either world - work/church sets are universally useful but a joaquin level FF set for duellers is not.

 

[Harsha..]

Not sure if I am in the minority with this or not but I didn't need the flowers on colorado or arizona and I didn't feel like struggling to collect them so didn't try for flowers on either world - work/church sets are universally useful but a joaquin level FF set for duellers is not.

The idea is that, even if you're doing your regular, normal tasks without flowers in mind you'll still wind up collecting some amount of flowers. In Arizona for example I got 100k just doing my normal (non event) activity. In Briscoe where my normal activity is even less I got only 50k.

That's the reason I think numbers of flower collected is helpful - it'll tell us how much players are generally motivated to play in a particular world and how much that activity changes with time. We can see Kansas activity level is actually close to that of Galv - so that reveals that world is in a bad shape and would be next in line to be closed.

 

[Annie-Bell]

How many fort battles on worlds? Is it possible to get an updated census also?

Just adding some other ff info period of Oct 1 - Nov 21 (about 7 weeks, about 50 days)

AZ ----14 awesomia battles, 19 non awesomia regular battles
BR ----14 awesomia battles, 4 non awesomia regular battles
CO ---- many many (lots 4-5 a day at times, about 150-200 total) (*** daily, multiple battles/perday world)
DK - not on that world - cant get info
ED---- 14 awesomia battles, 6 non awesomia regular battles
FB---- 11 awesomia battles, 3 non awesomia regular battles
GV ---- 8 awesomia battles, 6 non awesomia regular battles
Id ----- 7 awesomia battles, 10 non awesomia regular battles
Ju---- 6 awesomia battles, 38 non awesomia regular battles (*** daily battle world, generally)
Ka----- 6 awesomia battles, 4 non awesomia regular battles
LV----- 9 awesomia battles, 8 non awesomia regular battles
Mn---- 8 awesomia battles, 40 non awesomia regular battles (*** daily battle world, generally)

 

[Caerdwyn]

Just adding some other ff info period of Oct 1 - Nov 21 (about 7 weeks, about 50 days)

AZ ----14 awesomia battles, 19 non awesomia regular battles
BR ----14 awesomia battles, 4 non awesomia regular battles
CO ---- many many (lots 4-5 a day at times, about 150-200 total) (*** daily, multiple battles/perday world)
DK - not on that world - cant get info
ED---- 14 awesomia battles, 6 non awesomia regular battles
FB---- 11 awesomia battles, 3 non awesomia regular battles
GV ---- 8 awesomia battles, 6 non awesomia regular battles
Id ----- 7 awesomia battles, 10 non awesomia regular battles
Ju---- 6 awesomia battles, 38 non awesomia regular battles (*** daily battle world, generally)
Ka----- 6 awesomia battles, 4 non awesomia regular battles
LV----- 9 awesomia battles, 8 non awesomia regular battles
Mn---- 8 awesomia battles, 40 non awesomia regular battles (*** daily battle world, generally)

DK = 8 Awesomia, 32 non-Awesomia

 

[Bob Baumeister]

Not sure if I am in the minority with this or not but I didn't need the flowers on colorado or arizona and I didn't feel like struggling to collect them so didn't try for flowers on either world - work/church sets are universally useful but a joaquin level FF set for duellers is not.

It doesn't matter either way because this would be true any world.

Besides people also farm flowers to get additional bonds. I doubt the free set is a prio for many, whether it's this set or (m)any of the others.

 

[Symbiote]

>




they really should blow up lv <15 accounts faster than they do with regular no activity accounts. mildly annoyed by their presence, just standing there... menacingly... from 3375 Colorado player count on xp rank, only 2121 are above lv15. 1/3 of the world are zombies that didn't go through the first milestone of picking your class that takes no more than 1 hours to complete. it can't be zero, so how much of server processing power having these hanging around takes? add this to my previous take on the maintenance cost for low userbase worlds.

my parameter to evaluate a world density is the saloon volume and stage. saloon 2 at +125 players = good; saloon 1 at <75 players = bad. i was told that multi players usually removes them from saloon while they are at it. i am fairly sure that what makes a multiplayer game to be fun is to have as much people to play with, so people flock into the hub due to its gravitational force pulling the userbase based on FOMO. does people stick with small worlds nonetheless? my opinion is not free from bias as i have no experience on low activity worlds so i don't get the vibe to stay there and only there, thus my questioning on where the mains and alts are.

 

[Annie-Bell]

DK = 8 Awesomia, 32 non-Awesomia

thank you for filling in dakota ff info ... and nice is also one of the worlds with battles (about 5-7 battles per week) well done dakota

 

[Annie-Bell]

>
they really should blow up lv <15 accounts faster than they do with regular no activity accounts. mildly annoyed by their presence, just standing there... menacingly... from 3375 Colorado player count on xp rank, only 2121 are above lv15. 1/3 of the world are zombies that didn't go through the first milestone of picking your class that takes no more than 1 hours to complete. it can't be zero, so how much of server processing power having these hanging around takes? add this to my previous take on the maintenance cost for low userbase worlds.

my parameter to evaluate a world density is the saloon volume and stage. saloon 2 at +125 players = good; saloon 1 at <75 players = bad. i was told that multi players usually removes them from saloon while they are at it. i am fairly sure that what makes a multiplayer game to be fun is to have as much people to play with, so people flock into the hub due to its gravitational force pulling the userbase based on FOMO. does people stick with small worlds nonetheless? my opinion is not free from bias as i have no experience on low activity worlds so i don't get the vibe to stay there and only there, thus my questioning on where the mains and alts are.

The 1759 players over level 40 included in graph (above) for colo seems bit clearer then the 3375 accounts overall. There is general consensus even within that 1759 there is great deal of multi accounts pulled out during events, who knows how many 25%? Know some have several of these but impossible to manage, and puts players who have one account per world at disadvantage. More populated worlds like colo or newer worlds people can get away with, and inno rarely sees. For a world wide game, the busiest world dropped off significantly - as all worlds - over the years, esp in last 4 years

Very much agree inno should delete the inactive level 15ish accounts, if someone coming to check out then leaves, shorter time span then a level 150 account just makes sense. These level 1-15ish accounts are people checking out colo, or trolls were we literally watch troll saloons, get banned and create new 5-6 new account within min to keep spamming whatever they were spammin but these accounts also stick around for month or however long takes inno to remove. So agree shorter time period for deleting characters like that so people have more accurate. On frustration point, seen a group of players (in colo, and other worlds), who create multis just to name horrid names multi toons to insult players, know they do with their town names as well, and usually these multis are banned but visually seeing them with horrid names for month is a bummer. So appreciate seeing the more active in graph.

For smaller worlds, my suspicion is people working on toons waiting for some sort of merge/migration to occur. Some of the worlds have 20 people in saloon (thus multi's not really a thing, will be caught and just not worth if using multis during events). There is sentimental to some worlds that keep players there. Some like galv few hanging out to turn out lights when inno finally closes door (houston and galv were announced together while back). Somthing to keep in mind is of these smaller worlds, the ones still there are generally are also in at least one other world (or many worlds, so closure of a world not necessarily huge increase in other worlds - eg. only know of about 3 players in the deadest world that are in no other world.

I stayed around until few hours prior to close of houston, (helen stayed until few min before lol!!) .. but even couple hours before, looking at player list, there was about 100 accounts that players just left in houston as closed doors, suspect same for any future migrations of smaller worlds IF and when happens.

This game was very cool and unique, shame inno main didnt invest in it, and the inno in last few years has driven players away ... many fondly remember numbers in good ol days.

 

[Clever Hans]

New stats 07/04/24 vs previous report 28/08/23 (Navajo added, Houston removed)

World Name​ ​	Number of lvl40+ accounts​	Number of lvl150+ accs​	Number of lvl180+ accs​	Top ranked exp player​
Arizona​	802 (-60)​	543 (-5)​	228 (+62)​	Challenger-71 560M (lvl 208, +7)​
Briscoe​	358 (-29)​	250 (-7)​	122 (+28)​	Doc Scurlock 407.5M (lvl 205, +5)​
Colorado​	1900 (+229)​	527 (+29)​	169 (+50)​	benben7 655.6M (lvl 220, +8)​
Dakota​	372 (-38)​	235 (-3)​	79 (+36)​	Johnny45s 468.9M (lvl 209, +6)​
El Dorado​	293 (-17)​	187 (-11)​	61 (+20)​	pghracer 370,8M (lvl 202, +8)​
Fairbank​	460 (-48)​	299 (-28)​	94 (+40)​	silverlady1 391,1M (lvl 204, +7)​
Galveston registration closed​	127 (-46)​	56 (-6)​	6 (+3)​	Elvis. 313.6M (lvl 197, +6)​
Navajo​	559​	3​	0​	Aivos 37M (lvl 156)​
Idaho​	289 (-36)​	128 (+9)​	17 (+5)​	Mary Jane Read 422.7M (lvl 198, +8)​
Juarez​	352 (-67)​	131 (+23)​	9 (+6)​	Luke Cow Walker 340M (lvl 200, +8)​
Kansas​	366 (-149)​	77 (+15)​	3 (+2)​	Luke Cow Walker 293.8M (lvl 196, +9)​
Las Vegas​	418 (-169)​	27 (-2)​	4 (+4)​	chigra 197.3M (lvl 186, +10)​
Montana​	409 (-225)​	22 (+6)​	1 (+1)​	Dodgez 150.6M (lvl 180, new no1)​

Longest Easter event winner streak on April 7th 2024:

Arizona - 759
Briscoe - 338
Colorado - 1237
Dakota - 559
El Dorado - 237
Fairbank - 253
Galveston - 268
Idaho - 244
Juarez - 365
Kansas - 311
Las Vegas - 365
Montana - 240
Navajo - 1740

 

[Killer Bonnie]

About 2k total players maybe on all of . Net? Because most play multiple worlds.

 

[NovaStar]

About 2k total players maybe on all of . Net? Because most play multiple worlds.

I would venture to say even less (unless Colorado has enough to make up to 2k ...)

 

[Clever Hans]

Probably less than 1,5k players left on .net from the numbers above (7 worlds are under 400 accounts now).
Also, only 3-4 worlds which seem to be generating some profit during the Easter event. There will be several worlds with the winners of the event weapons without any nuggets used.

 

[BigNoob]

What I cant believe is the Navajo winning streak, someone gave inno 400€ (and probably more until the event ends) for weapons in Navajo, a very promising world as we all know.

 

[chydovish4e]

he wil wait for migration