Population drops

[Foeclan.1698]

Looks like every server went down a level in terms of population.  You folks doing some tinkering?

[Gehenna.3625]

Seems to be mostly on the NA side.

[SFShinigami.1572]

Well T1 NA, the tier with the most active servers, has taken a huge hit in play in recent weeks.  Similarly, T2 is also somewhat muted because people don't want to be in T1.  So basically half the servers in NA, which comprise more than half of the population of potential NA WvWers, either aren't playing, or are playing less.

[Xenesis.6389]

41 minutes ago, SFShinigami.1572 said:

Well T1 NA, the tier with the most active servers, has taken a huge hit in play in recent weeks.  Similarly, T2 is also somewhat muted because people don't want to be in T1.  So basically half the servers in NA, which comprise more than half of the population of potential NA WvWers, either aren't playing, or are playing less.

It was a drop through all tiers, did Mag scare the T3/4 servers too? Don't think it was a seasonal population drop, a big drop across the board like that tends to point to them moving the threshold lines for each level. The only people really sitting out is BG and SoS lately cause of T1, doesn't explain why T3/4 servers dropped also.

[Tryfan.1457]

No.

 

There was no ANet intervention at all. This is still the same stupid algorithm failing again.

 

How it works is this. The population rating of each server is judged relative to the #1 server. No one knows the exact percentages but a simple example (probably not accurate but gives the idea in action here) would be 100%-75% (of the #1 server's activity) is "full", 75%-50% is "very high", 50%-25% is "high", and 25%-0% is "medium" (there is no "low" for various reasons, some financial some psychological).

 

What happened was Maguuma opened up a few weeks ago and hundreds of people transferred in. These population ratings don't change on a minute by minute basis, they are based on a period of time.

 

Now, these people have factored in to the activity tracker. And Maguuma, already the most populated server in the game, skyrocketed even higher. WAY higher.

 

Servers who were at 80% of its activity are now at 70%. Those at 55% are now at 45%. Etc.

 

ANet did nothing. You people should know by now there is no person paying any attention to the populations (or anything else in WvW) at all. They rely 100% on their failing algorithm to do their work for them. And now this has happened. Maguuma is so big that no other server can even get into the same population bracket as them.

[Xenesis.6389]

9 minutes ago, Tryfan.1457 said:

What happened was Maguuma opened up a few weeks ago and hundreds of people transferred in. These population ratings don't change on a minute by minute basis, they are based on a period of time.

And yet a server like BG opens and closes in a matter of hours...

[moutzaheadin.4029]

10 minutes ago, Tryfan.1457 said:

No.

 

There was no ANet intervention at all. This is still the same stupid algorithm failing again.

 

How it works is this. The population rating of each server is judged relative to the #1 server. No one knows the exact percentages but a simple example (probably not accurate but gives the idea in action here) would be 100%-75% (of the #1 server's activity) is "full", 75%-50% is "very high", 50%-25% is "high", and 25%-0% is "medium" (there is no "low" for various reasons, some financial some psychological).

 

What happened was Maguuma opened up a few weeks ago and hundreds of people transferred in. These population ratings don't change on a minute by minute basis, they are based on a period of time.

 

Now, these people have factored in to the activity tracker. And Maguuma, already the most populated server in the game, skyrocketed even higher. WAY higher.

 

Servers who were at 80% of its activity are now at 70%. Those at 55% are now at 45%. Etc.

 

ANet did nothing. You people should know by now there is no person paying any attention to the populations (or anything else in WvW) at all. They rely 100% on their failing algorithm to do their work for them. And now this has happened. Maguuma is so big that no other server can even get into the same population bracket as them.

Source = Trust me bromeo

[Tryfan.1457]

20 minutes ago, Xenesis.6389 said:

And yet a server like BG opens and closes in a matter of hours...

The API reporting can be funky. I have seen BG report weekly three straight weeks of going up a population bracket, despite already being at "full" every single time including before it started. Sometimes the updates don't seem to include every server, too - a month ago only six servers reported at all. Not that the others didn't change, they didn't have any update period.

[Chaba.5410]

1 hour ago, Logan.4796 said:

No. Every server opened up for transfers other than Mag so Mag could have better competition.

I'm being serious. Pretty sure this is an exact reason why

FA opened over a week ago.

[Chaba.5410]

45 minutes ago, Tryfan.1457 said:

The population rating of each server is judged relative to the #1 server.

This has never been indicated by Anet to be the case.

[Graymatter.4723]

1 hour ago, Logan.4796 said:

No. Every server opened up for transfers other than Mag so Mag could have better competition.

I'm being serious. Pretty sure this is an exact reason why

As much as you love patting yourself on the back. That's not what changed. Servers like Tarnished Coast have been full for months and dropped 2 tiers over the last 2 weeks. Servers that were very high have dropped to medium. Those servers aren't going to suddenly be "competition" for mag.

This was more than likely caused by a change in metrics for how they measure active players in WvW.

[Graymatter.4723]

4 hours ago, Logan.4796 said:

Explains it properly

It's a good thing that Tryfan.1457 knows exactly what the formula is when A/Net haven't told us the formula they used. But don't worry, take that as gospel if it makes you feel better.

[TheGrimm.5624]

7 hours ago, Logan.4796 said:

No. Every server opened up for transfers other than Mag so Mag could have better competition.

I'm being serious. Pretty sure this is an exact reason why

You might want to stop and re read the devs posts on how they define the populations. They had taken the top most populated server and used it as a metric of full and then adjust everyone else form there to drive the populations to other servers. So where we are at is Mag is the new over populated server and they adjusted other servers based on Mag's numbers till they rebalance again. Again we don't have the numbers they used but this is the technique they used in the past. 

[TheGrimm.5624]

9 minutes ago, Logan.4796 said:

 

 

😐

You might want to stop and re read this entire forum page for this thread.......

 

??? All 16? Why did you think any reply hadn't read just 16? I mean I guess if it had been 300 then ok maybe, but just 16? So again, have read the devs posts on how populations are gauged and how locks are set, yes or no?

[TheGrimm.5624]

1 minute ago, Logan.4796 said:

Dev Tracker

Showing topics and articles posted by 153 members and posted in for the last 999 weeks.





Pretty please do me a favor and look through the dev tracker and cite your sources / link some Dev posts. At least one of these "16" you claim exist.

16 was from this thread. You said reread this post. Where would you doubt people replying didn't read 16 posts?

[TheGrimm.5624]

Just now, Logan.4796 said:

Are you trolling me dude?


----> So again, have read the devs posts on how populations are gauged and how locks are set, yes or no? <---


WHAT DEV POSTS?!?!

Show
T h e m

🙂 My thread history is out there. I don't think I troll, maybe I am biased. Forum friends tend to post where I seem to stray, and yes I thank them for that since it means I didn't stop and not group think. Helps to make me stop and not just post one side, or least in my own mind. Granted never claimed to play with all marbles but...

[TheGrimm.5624]

Just now, Logan.4796 said:

 

It is impossible for me to read posts that you are referencing unless you show the referenced posts. This conversation is at an end until you can remotely display what it is you want to read. In a credible format that isn't some textual copy paste. Like a screenshot or an actual link to the dev post would be perfect.

But I genuinely have a feeling you're not capable of providing these things and are simply trolling.

lol, so you are unwilling to do research, and why the caps?

[TheGrimm.5624]

1 minute ago, Logan.4796 said:

 

It is impossible for me to read posts that you are referencing unless you show the referenced posts. This conversation is at an end until you can remotely display what it is you want to read. In a credible format that isn't some textual copy paste. Like a screenshot or an actual link to the dev post would be perfect.

But I genuinely have a feeling you're not capable of providing these things and are simply trolling.

and I wish I was a troll, so I wouldn't have felt the need to defend Mag for their legit players versus their zerglings...

[Graymatter.4723]

4 hours ago, Logan.4796 said:

Do NOT attempt to troll me. Don't attempt a strawman's argument with me.
 

No one knows the exact percentages but a simple example (probably not accurate but gives the idea in action here)

(probably not accurate but gives the idea in action here)

probably not accurate

not accurate

You are the one with the conspiracy theories about all servers opening up so mag can have competition. You then quoted a person who is basically just guessing the system that A/Net use for populations and using that as your justification. All of this and I am the one trolling?

Nobody outside of A/Net knows that system they use for determining activity on a server. They certainly aren't going to leave mag open for weeks and weeks while everyone transfers across there. They would have some sort of figures and, as an example, let 100 people transfer and then it becomes full. The person you quoted also said that A/Net opened Mag up a few weeks ago (not true, it was longer), and then, all of  sudden there was a massive influx of people. The person then says that populations aren't calculated on a minute by minute basis and these things are only performed periodically. But the whole "everyone transferred to mag" story just doesn't work with any logic because Tarnished Coast changed twice over the last 2 weeks, first from full to very high, and again now from vert high to high. If everyone was "transferring to mag over the last few weeks" and the server populations were being calculated periodically then it would make sense that mag would have ended up full after a week because that's how long the population changes take place (using TC as an example).

It's clear that A/Net have changed the metrics that they use for determining population. What changes were made, anyone can guess.

Edited January 18, 2023 by Graymatter.4723

[Sahne.6950]

4 hours ago, Logan.4796 said:

Dev Tracker

Showing topics and articles tagged 'population', posted by 153 members and posted in for the last 9,999 weeks.

 

153: members

Time Period: Past 9999 weeks

 

There are no results to show in this activity stream yet


-------------------------------------


You really need to stop trolling. Especially with the excessive spam. Your dev comments do not exist.

holy moly...

@TheGrimm.5624 is right... i believe its been said in one of their streams.

btw, am i the only one thinking that the population has dropped.... because the population has dropped? I know alot of people that dont set a foot in WvW anymore. Solo roaming is nonexistant in EU.

 

Edited January 18, 2023 by Sahne.6950

[Chaba.5410]

1 hour ago, Sahne.6950 said:

btw, am i the only one thinking that the population has dropped.... because the population has dropped? I know alot of people that dont set a foot in WvW anymore. Solo roaming is nonexistant in EU.

You're not. Based on my personal and imperfect understanding of the system, it takes a few weeks for the rolling average to budge in a direction so it would not be unexpected to see a seasonal holiday dip after some delay. It would also not be unexpected knowing of all the mass tanking by certain servers to avoid NA T1 matches, or just bored with those.

That said, the other possibility is that thresholds were adjusted. There would be no way to tell.

[TheGrimm.5624]

11 hours ago, Logan.4796 said:

Dev Tracker

Showing topics and articles posted by 153 members and posted in for the last 999 weeks.





Pretty please do me a favor and look through the dev tracker and cite your sources / link some Dev posts. At least one of these "16" you claim exist.

First of as usual , thanks again to the people that put their time into the game wiki. You all have done a really good job and thank you for your time.

Logan a good first spot when I mentioned research is the game wiki. This is a crazy amount of information that people complied there. Again the 16 I was referring to is the 16 posts to this thread that you mentioned re-reading, not the full dev tracker that I think I was referring to.

Either way this might of interest, the first being the larger wiki page and the second being logic when they changed how populations would be calculated:

https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/World

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/World-Population-Changes-Are-Coming/page/5#post5326517 

Hope that helps.

Edited January 18, 2023 by TheGrimm.5624
spelling

[Tryfan.1457]

9 hours ago, Graymatter.4723 said:

 They certainly aren't going to leave mag open for weeks and weeks while everyone transfers across there.

 

They did exactly that.

 

9 hours ago, Graymatter.4723 said:

They would have some sort of figures and, as an example, let 100 people transfer and then it becomes full.

This is incorrect and can easily be shown so. Entire guilds routinely transfer in transfer windows without half of them getting locked out because some arbitrary number was reached. If it didn't work on a period system, it would be like trying to transfer BGs and hitting a queue. That doesn't happen, at least not to people who don't dawdle their transfer for days or weeks.

9 hours ago, Graymatter.4723 said:

The person you quoted also said that A/Net opened Mag up a few weeks ago (not true, it was longer)

December 19th to January 2nd. "A few weeks ago" seems pretty accurate to me. You're not batting very high in this post right now.

9 hours ago, Graymatter.4723 said:

But the whole "everyone transferred to mag" story just doesn't work with any logic because Tarnished Coast changed twice over the last 2 weeks, first from full to very high, and again now from vert high to high. If everyone was "transferring to mag over the last few weeks" and the server populations were being calculated periodically then it would make sense that mag would have ended up full after a week because that's how long the population changes take place (using TC as an example).

 

You're forgetting that the metric isn't calculated by population alone, it is measured by activity in WvW, and that activity isn't measured daily either. Maguuma opened because BG kept refusing to play and the other t1 server, SoS, only plays in Maguuma downtime. The tanking got so real that Maguuma wasn't even the #1 server for activity anymore because there was so little to do for much of the day. This wasn't a new problem either. Look at the links Maguuma was getting for months. FC. IoJ. YB. Not powerhouses by any means but as far as link activity go, definitely on the upper end of the scale. If it was just "population" Maguuma would have been getting desolations like DR and SF.

 

Most of your post is provably wrong and the idea ANet took direct action to open servers just isn't necessary.

Edited January 18, 2023 by Tryfan.1457

[Hesione.9412]

21 hours ago, Xenesis.6389 said:

It was a drop through all tiers, did Mag scare the T3/4 servers too? Don't think it was a seasonal population drop, a big drop across the board like that tends to point to them moving the threshold lines for each level. The only people really sitting out is BG and SoS lately cause of T1, doesn't explain why T3/4 servers dropped also.

There is a certain comm and his fight guild in T4, along with a couple more fight guilds. SBI and SF are not known for having large fight guilds.

[Hesione.9412]

20 hours ago, Tryfan.1457 said:

No.

 

There was no ANet intervention at all. This is still the same stupid algorithm failing again.

 

How it works is this. The population rating of each server is judged relative to the #1 server. No one knows the exact percentages but a simple example (probably not accurate but gives the idea in action here) would be 100%-75% (of the #1 server's activity) is "full", 75%-50% is "very high", 50%-25% is "high", and 25%-0% is "medium" (there is no "low" for various reasons, some financial some psychological).

 

What happened was Maguuma opened up a few weeks ago and hundreds of people transferred in. These population ratings don't change on a minute by minute basis, they are based on a period of time.

 

Now, these people have factored in to the activity tracker. And Maguuma, already the most populated server in the game, skyrocketed even higher. WAY higher.

 

Servers who were at 80% of its activity are now at 70%. Those at 55% are now at 45%. Etc.

 

ANet did nothing. You people should know by now there is no person paying any attention to the populations (or anything else in WvW) at all. They rely 100% on their failing algorithm to do their work for them. And now this has happened. Maguuma is so big that no other server can even get into the same population bracket as them.

How does this work? Do people sitting in a large queue to get into a BG get counted as active?