This game is not dying. CV-Ship interaction can be improved. #s are your friend

[Merc_R_Us]

If you have statistical proof the game is dying, please share. Keep in mind, the below are poor answers (I'll share why):

• My friends don't play it anymore
  • What was the first 3 games you ever played? Do you and your friends still play them? Personally, I played, Risk 2, Star Wars Rogue Squadron, and Sim City 2000. Loved them but haven't played them in decades.
• Some Content Contributors have left 
  • If you have ever played any other popular game, you would know that many have left their original games as content contributors. Why, because eventually, people get bored of the same thing over and over again.
• Current contributors say it is dying
  • Do they share statistical figures on this? I haven't come across yet. Do they have access to this information? As they make money by contributions and your attention, does it make sense for them to share their opinion and even make it entertaining for you?

Now back to why I'm here. Please look at the below from Steamcharts.com. Here is the link to the World of Warships info:

https://steamcharts.com/app/552990#All 1

Compare the 2 numbers I show by hovering on the timeline. Note that in the second image I hover to a Pre-COVID date.  

 

Now obviously this isn't the end all be all figures. If you want to critique it, go ahead. However, please support your argument that the game is dying with your own numbers.

I am always for changing my position when new data supports it. 

 

EDIT: I also want to address the drop at the end of the chart. Using COVID era numbers aren't a good indication that the game is dying. Most people are going back to work or finding new opportunities. Once we get a handle on COVID, the numbers can be more reliable.

[CommodoreKang]

What happens when a F2P game has servers full of players who've invested in just about all the premiums they are ever going to need?

I wish I knew the answer.  But, I'm pretty sure WG does.  And I'll just bet they have a plan for that! 

Sadly, i don't think they are the type to share that sort of thing :(

[Merc_R_Us]

Just now, CommodoreKang said:

What happens when a F2P game has servers full of players who've invested in just about all the premiums they are ever going to need?

I wish I knew the answer.  But, I'm pretty sure WG does.  And I'll just bet they have a plan for that! 

Sadly, i don't think they are the type to share that sort of thing :(

Yeah I don't know either.

[RipNuN2]

6 minutes ago, CommodoreKang said:

 And I'll just bet they have a plan for that!

 

 

[CommodoreKang]

2 minutes ago, RipNuN2 said:

 

 

Hopefully it turns out better than that one!

[ramp4ge]

Look at the stats up close.

 

The 'bubble' we've seen recently just so happens to start in or around March of 2020.

 

What happened in March of 2020 that gave a whole lot of people a whole lot of spare time to sit down and play video games?

When you look at the stats up close you'll see that they've actually been steadily declining back to the pre-Covid norms of around +-7500, barring anomalies like the Black Friday sales weekend.

 

Picking 2 dates doesn't prove anything. It's the overall trend you want to look at. 

 

 

[SeaKing_CityDel]

3 minutes ago, ramp4ge said:

Look at the stats up close.

The 'bubble' we've seen recently just so happens to start in or around March of 2020.

What happened in March of 2020 that gave a whole lot of people a whole lot of spare time to sit down and play video games?

When you look a the stats up close you'll see that they've actually been steadily declining back to the pre-Covid norms of around +-7500, barring anomalies like the Black Friday sales weekend.

 

 

your point?  He's specifically mentioned pre china virus numbers so you can ignore those and op still is right .  

[ramp4ge]

Just now, SeaKing_CityDel said:

your point?  He's specifically mentioned pre china virus numbers so you can ignore those and op still is right .  

 

My point is pretty clear. You can't pick 2 dates on a 2 year trend to prove anything without providing any kind of context or ignoring the greater trend between those dates. 

 

The game may not be "dying" but it's not growing either. Which to a company trying to make money is just as bad. 

 

I'm not surprised there was a spike in players on December 30th 2019. A lot of people are on vacation, and Wargaming is usually running some kind of New Years event. Again, these are the types of anomalies that artificially inflate the numbers and when you don't provide context it looks like something it's not.

[Merc_R_Us]

6 minutes ago, ramp4ge said:

Look at the stats up close.

 

The 'bubble' we've seen recently just so happens to start in or around March of 2020.

 

What happened in March of 2020 that gave a whole lot of people a whole lot of spare time to sit down and play video games?

When you look at the stats up close you'll see that they've actually been steadily declining back to the pre-Covid norms of around +-7500, barring anomalies like the Black Friday sales weekend.

 

Picking 2 dates doesn't prove anything. It's the overall trend you want to look at. 

 

 

 

Seriously? 

I specifically used pre covid #s.

I specifically used a 3 year range.

The numbers are going back down to Pre Covid norms. Where do they stop? I don't know. The argument that the game is dying is not valid. Maybe down the line sure.

 

 

1 minute ago, SeaKing_CityDel said:

your point?  He's specifically mentioned pre china virus numbers so you can ignore those and op still is right .  

 

[Navalpride33]

Unfortunately, 3rd party charts are not as accurate as you think they are...

Convincing, people with limited access to concrete data.. Is a losing cause... 

People will compare things from say one year ago or two years ago to come to a conclusion...

For me it falls on a few factors.

• Lack of active population
  • The definition of "active population" doesn't mean to just log on to trigger 3rd party charts.
• Lack of participation
  • CB or similar events participation are not where they're suppose to be compared to last year
• Clan consolidation
  • More clans are finding members to those who have left
  • More clans are finding it hard to maintain the numbers and the activity levels for say CB.
• Less population in low tiers.

As much as I like to point out how your chart is flawed... Its not enough "evidence" to convince you the game is going down at a human aging rate.

Even with all the factors (not govern by a 3rd party), listed above.

[Merc_R_Us]

Just now, ramp4ge said:

 

My point is pretty clear. You can't pick 2 dates on a 2 year trend to prove anything without providing any kind of context or ignoring the greater trend between those dates. 

 

The game may not be "dying" but it's not growing either. Which to a company trying to make money is just as bad. 

 

I'm not surprised there was a spike in players on December 30th 2019. A lot of people are on vacation, and Wargaming is usually running some kind of New Years event. Again, these are the types of anomalies that artificially inflate the numbers and when you don't provide context it looks like something it's not.

Pick any date in 2019. It is higher than 2016 number I showed. Do you want to point to every holiday of the last 2 years to say that it's inflated?

[SeaKing_CityDel]

6 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said:

Unfortunately, 3rd party charts are not as accurate as you think they are...

Convincing, people with limited access to concrete data.. Is a losing cause... 

People will compare things from say one year ago or two years ago to come to a conclusion...

For me it falls on a few factors.

• Lack of active population
  • The definition of active doesn't mean to just log on to trigger 3rd party charts.
• Lack of participation
  • CB or similar events participation is not where they're suppose to be compared to last year
• Clan consolidation
  • More clans are finding members to those who have left
  • More clans are finding it hard to maintain the numbers and the activity levels for say CB.
• Less population in low tiers.

As much as I like to point out how your chart is flawed... Its not enough "evidence" to convince you the game is going down at a human aging rate.

Even with all the factors (not govern by a 3rd party), listed above.

where are your numbers coming from? from what i remember the numbers are the same as last year for clan battles using maple syrup btw.

cant use clan consolidation as there can be many reasons for people to move on . 

lower population at low tiers can be used only for growth as more people grind through lines theres less reason to play lower tiers . 

[Compassghost]

So, if it's lack of data that's a concern... I would not trust Steam charts because not everyone plays Steam, and active player count is highly dependent on time of day. Player retention is typically measured by week, so we can use Maplesyrup data for that. Luckily for us, Maplesyrup is extra-greedy and fetches every player's data it can get its grubby hands on.

http://maplesyrup.sweet.coocan.jp/wows/ranking/pastrecords/index.html

 

I took the Un-based data going back to February. The reason I picked Un rather than Pl is because Pl counts players only if they meet a certain play requirement.

 

High Tiers are relatively stable, with BBs and CVs actually gaining player count over the course of the past 10 months, and cruisers going down, possibly due to AP rockets and increase in BB population.

Low Tiers experienced a significant boost around March, as expected, which has tapered down. This could be due to player churn, abandonment, or simply people moving to higher tiers and never going back to low tiers once they get there.

 

[Merc_R_Us]

1 minute ago, Navalpride33 said:

Unfortunately, 3rd party charts are not as accurate as you think they are...

Convincing, people with limited access to concrete data.. Is a losing cause... 

People will compare things from say one year ago or two years ago to come to a conclusion...

For me it falls on a few factors.

• Lack of active population
  • The definition of active doesn't mean to just log on to trigger 3rd party charts.
• Lack of participation
  • CB or similar events participation is not where they're suppose to be compared to last year
• Clan consolidation
  • More clans are finding members to those who have left
  • More clans are finding it hard to maintain the numbers and the activity levels for say CB.
• Less population in low tiers.

As much as I like to point out how your chart is flawed... Its not enough "evidence" to convince you the game is going down at a human aging rate.

Even with all the factors (not govern by a 3rd party), listed above.

Let me clear here, I am 100% convinced this game will die. Just like 90% of the games before it. Just want to get that outta the way.

3 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said:

Lack of active population

• The definition of active doesn't mean to just log on to trigger 3rd party charts.

 

What are you seeing that shows a lack of active population?

4 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said:

Lack of participation

• CB or similar events participation is not where they're suppose to be compared to last year

 

Interesting, can you show me the data on that or point me to where to look? Of course, you're not referencing the season where clans boycotted right?

5 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said:

Clan consolidation

• More clans are finding members to those who have left
• More clans are finding it hard to maintain the numbers and the activity levels for say CB.

 

I'm not sure what you mean on the 1st bullet.

How many clans are you referencing here? I can speak for 1 out of 2, it was hard to field a time for CB one season. 

6 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said:

Less population in low tiers.

100% this shows that the major growth period of this game is not where it was in the early days, but it's not the whole picture. 

There are less population in low tiers because:

• The game is not new anymore, so yes, there will be less players in the low tier.
• Most players do not go back to the lower tiers once they've leveled to the higher tier ships.
• There is a much larger pool of available Premium ships that people can outright buy than the early days. This would lead to people spending much less time in the low tier.

14 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said:

As much as I like to point out how your chart is flawed... Its not enough "evidence" to convince you the game is going down at a human aging rate.

100% this game is going down at a slow human aging rate.

This game however is not dying at a rate that warrants the number of posts/videos by Players/Streamers suggesting it is winding down at a housefly aging rate. 

[Merc_R_Us]

5 minutes ago, Compassghost said:

So, if it's lack of data that's a concern... I would not trust Steam charts because not everyone plays Steam, and active player count is highly dependent on time of day. Player retention is typically measured by week, so we can use Maplesyrup data for that. Luckily for us, Maplesyrup is extra-greedy and fetches every player's data it can get its grubby hands on.

http://maplesyrup.sweet.coocan.jp/wows/ranking/pastrecords/index.html

 

I took the Un-based data going back to February. The reason I picked Un rather than Pl is because Pl counts players only if they meet a certain play requirement.

 

High Tiers are relatively stable, with BBs and CVs actually gaining player count over the course of the past 10 months, and cruisers going down, possibly due to AP rockets and increase in BB population.

Low Tiers experienced a significant boost around March, as expected, which has tapered down. This could be due to player churn, abandonment, or simply people moving to higher tiers and never going back to low tiers once they get there.

 

Thank you for sharing that. I am unfamiliar with that site. I'm very hesitate to use this year's numbers as reliable in any way though, aren't you?

Does that site provide numbers for years past? 

[Navalpride33]

5 minutes ago, SeaKing_CityDel said:

where are your numbers coming from?

Simple observation and using math... I am consistent with my play time.. I have noticed a deep in the numbers compared to before patch 0.8.0..

On the above left of center from the port HUD, it shows you the server population. So in essence, I get my numbers in real time.. Not by 3rd party.

 

[Compassghost]

Maple originally included Pl to get ship metric data, meaning players with less than 10 games in certain ships and ship types were excluded from calculation.  You can also see total account numbers as they're added, but obviously that doesn't mean playing or active. Most of this data has been collected since at least 2016 on a weekly basis.

 

If you compare Pl, you have to compare Pl across the board.

 

It's important to note that players who only play Training Battles and other special battle types and events may not be counted in this at all.

 

[Koogus]

HEY! your not allowed to use data and facts here!

The playerbase only allows low effort whine posts 

 

[ramp4ge]

26 minutes ago, Merc_R_Us said:

Pick any date in 2019. It is higher than 2016 number I showed. Do you want to point to every holiday of the last 2 years to say that it's inflated?

 

You didn't show a 2016 number. You showed a 2017 number then compared it to a date in 2019 that just so happened to fall on a huge end-of-year event when people were trying to grind the PR and get snowflakes done and all that sort of thing. 

 

Looking at April 2017, we get an average over that 30 day period of +-7,500. 

 

Looking at April 2019, you get an average over that 30 day period of, surprise surprise, +-7,500 people.

 

No events, no anomalies, just a mundane early-summer month. 

 

Basically, any of the 2020 numbers will be skewed by Covid and events. The beginning of the year numbers will be skewed by the late-2019 events, the middle of the year will be skewed by Covid, the end of the year will be skewed by the late-2020 events.

 

2020 is a wash as far as statistics go when you're trying to find growth/decline. Looking to years prior to 2020, the game's been pretty much steady at an average daily max of +-7500 people. Again, not decline, but not growth either. 

 

Source.

[SeaKing_CityDel]

8 minutes ago, Merc_R_Us said:

 

100% this game is going down at a slow human aging rate.

This game however is not dying at a rate that warrants the number of posts/videos by Players/Streamers suggesting it is winding down at a housefly aging rate. 

i agree with you i hate cv's and cv players but people using this game is dying to get there point across infuriates me because how can anyone take them seriously on following points or ideas . specially wg themselves.       

btw when you point out that the game is not dying with proof theyll come back and say yeah but its not growing ....

 

5 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said:

Simple observation and using math... I am consistent with my play time.. I have noticed a deep in the numbers compared to before patch 0.8.0..

On the above left of center from the port HUD, it shows you the server population. So in essence, I get my numbers in real time.. Not by 3rd party.

 

thats anecdotal evidence and seems to be what most people use and its wrong when you have actual data to prove otherwise. 

[Navalpride33]

4 minutes ago, Merc_R_Us said:

This game however is not dying at a rate that warrants the number of posts/videos by Players/Streamers suggesting it is winding down at a housefly aging rate. 

I disagree, they're (streamers etc.) watching their data of (say youtube analytics), once it hits their pocket book... You'll see the raging for views as a Trojan horse for advocating change... 

This is not the first nor the last time this process has happened.

[warheart1992]

What these stats prove is that WoWs is getting some traction on Steam. These numbers don't represent the whole playerbase, only the ones playing via Steam, and only from end of October 2017 onwards, when the game was released on Steam.

I know this for a fact since I am playing on and off this game since CBT in 2015, and after a couple of months hiatus I started using the Steam version of WoWs with my WG account in 2017. Furthermore, I 've been following player populations since they are pretty interesting as a gauge of events, WG decisions etc.

So, I've been using a lesser known website that pulls server data from WoWs api across all servers. Of course there's bound to be some mistakes, but I have found most of it's data to be a decent indicator all things considered.

EU server:

https://stats.wotapi.ru/stats/wows/eu/total#null

 

 

RU server:

https://stats.wotapi.ru/stats/wows/ru/total

NA server:

https://stats.wotapi.ru/stats/wows/na/total

There's even more info on these pages, month to month stats, 24h stats etc.

Bottom line what do we infer from these stats?

1. The game was slowly declining, remained stagnant or saw very incremental increases in popularity until autumn/fall  2019
2. The rise  recently is obviously explainable due to pandemic related events; other games witnessed a similar rise in player numbers and it's to be expected.
3. Game isn't dying, but isn't improving that much either, considering it took a global pandemic to significantly increase player numbers.

Tl;dr Is the game dying? No, but it's in a state of stagnation since 2017.

 

[Navalpride33]

1 minute ago, SeaKing_CityDel said:

 

thats anecdotal evidence and seems to be what most people use and its wrong when you have actual data to prove otherwise. 

So data in real time is not evidence for you...

So data in real time of server population is not reliable for you...Its a good as first hand evidence you have in the HUD that is very useful (at least for me).  But yet, you want me to believe a 3rd party chart as more reliable VS my observation of the server population in real time...

Come on bro... I'll take real time information then information touched by a 3rd party any day...

[Compassghost]

If we're using the online chart from wotapi, this is historical online for the life of the server.

 

[CommodoreKang]

8 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said:

So data in real time is not evidence for you...

So data in real time of server population is not reliable for you...Its a good as first hand evidence you have in the HUD that is very useful (at least for me).  But yet, you want me to believe a 3rd party chart as more reliable VS my observation of the server population in real time...

Come on bro... I'll take real time information then information touched by a 3rd party any day...

It's an accuracy vs precision thing.  Sometimes accuracy is more useful than precision in certain situations. 

The numbers you have are probably much more precise but very, very sparse and somewhat anecdotal.

These 3rd party utilities are typically missing chunks of the data but the data they do have is very precise for that data set.  It's very dense data and very consistent data which makes it very accurate.

And so the 3rd party utilities are probably much more useful to determine the delta of the data it represents.  And so that delta is probably much more accurate than yours.  

And assuming the data set covered by the third parties is either large enough or random enough, you can probably extrapolate that to the entire set with a limited margin of error that you can actually calculate if you wanted to.