Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
LordNyberg

Number of active players

32 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
16 posts
8,641 battles

Hi all, my first post so have patience!

From time to time there are discussions in this forum regarding the success of WoWS. Is the playerbase growing or not? I have found many opinions but not so many facts. I thought I rather check for myself. On the homepage I found the the server status. At this very moment13 k something players (EU). 

I realized that if I could find somewhere where someone collected these figures at the same time everyday, I could actually say that "Yeah, we are growing by xx% this year!" or something similar based on facts.

 

Does anyone know if this kind of stats can be found anywhere?

Actaully, I think that the typical evening player base (approximately 24-25 k users) is growing, but as I can't find historical data I'm not sure.
 

screenshot.26.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[W_I_G]
Players
3,168 posts
9,352 battles
4 minutes ago, LordNyberg said:

Hi all, my first post so have patience!

From time to time there are discussions in this forum regarding the success of WoWS. Is the playerbase growing or not? I have found many opinions but not so many facts. I thought I rather check for myself. On the homepage I found the the server status. At this very moment13 k something players (EU). 

I realized that if I could find somewhere where someone collected these figures at the same time everyday, I could actually say that "Yeah, we are growing by xx% this year!" or something similar based on facts.

 

Does anyone know if this kind of stats can be found anywhere?

Actaully, I think that the typical evening player base (approximately 24-25 k users) is growing, but as I can't find historical data I'm not sure.
 

screenshot.26.jpg

 

iirc at start it was 40-50k for few months, then it dropped to 30k peak. for year or two. normally in prime hours it is between 20-30k on EU servers. i wouldnt say it is growing (at least per peak players), but it has constant playerbase.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
350 posts
3,426 battles

I rarely check players online, but i from what i remember  in prime time (7-10 PM CET ) there are around 25k players online.

 

I play since 13 months, and numbers have been roughly the same.

 

Think average population is steady or slowly growing.

 

 

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[W_I_G]
Players
3,168 posts
9,352 battles
6 minutes ago, TheComedian1983 said:

Yep.

I play since start and there never was 40-50k players.

 

if you check that link above 45k players was max and it was in july 2015.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
248 posts

The numbers WG is pumping out is pretty much irrelevant to me.

 

For me to take that seriously it needs to audited by someone external and competent. The rest is pretty much propaganda and can be easily faked or manually abused.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[I401]
Beta Tester
843 posts
7,463 battles
7 minutes ago, TheComedian1983 said:

Yep.

I play since start and there never was 40-50k players.

 

Current record: 45448 (July 6, 2015 22:42:01)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
16 posts
8,641 battles
1 hour ago, Acetessigester said:

You can find what you want here.

 

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

Thanks a lot! The facts I was looking for!

 

So the game is in a kind of a steady state. Positive thinkers may find a slightly positive trend this fall (or do my eyes fool me?), but it is to early to say if the efforts WG has done lately will pay off. In a couple of months we will see if there is an established positive trend. I hope so as I have become really engaged in the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HEROZ]
Players
596 posts
5,864 battles

The problem with WOWS its it competition.

 

And the competition is WOT XD.

 

People try Wot, suddenly WoWs appears, some are interested, and then they will go back to tanks, because they have invested more money in them. If ships came before tanks we would have different trend. Good way for WG was to go on steam with ships, because that is a large untapped market for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
204 posts
321 battles

EU is fine, considering the 5M traffic:

https://www.similarweb.com/website/worldofwarships.eu#overview

But it doesn't grow according to

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

So the market seems satiated considering the state of the game and the competition that is against it.

A push for eSports would grow the numbers definetly, but due WG's monetization policy, not likely. So the only thing left is to introduce new engaging gameplay options because as for now WoT, WoWs, and WoWP run the same setup just with different flair. I could even argue, that co-op hurts this game more due player segmentation and lowering already low competent play to abysmal levels.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MASLO]
Beta Tester
663 posts
1,238 battles
On 12/20/2017 at 5:05 PM, TheComedian1983 said:

Yep.

I play since start and there never was 40-50k players.

 

Are you sure you played since the start? As far as i know, peak numbers were around 45-46k after wipe. And i didnt even need to check stats, i remember seeing the number top left of the game(and stats confirm that)...

It dropped back to 20s something like 6 months after wipe.

Peak according tho those stats is 45424

 

6 hours ago, Oderisson said:

The problem with WOWS its it competition.

 

And the competition is WOT XD.

 

People try Wot, suddenly WoWs appears, some are interested, and then they will go back to tanks, because they have invested more money in them. If ships came before tanks we would have different trend. Good way for WG was to go on steam with ships, because that is a large untapped market for them.

 

Not really true... The problem with WoWs is WG. That is all. Hell, i went from playing WoT for years and going to WoWs because it was more fun and had better gameplay, less camping, peekabooing etc. And then WG decided that is not how they want it to be and changed it into long range camping, island peekabooing BB infested crap. And suddenly... game wasnt so nice for the regulars, just for certain kind of people(ship fanboys, history fanboys, BB lovers and baddies who prefer not moving, just sitting there and clicking from long range).

 

I always find it funny how people think toxic community or bad play is the culprit of why WoWs is limping... and those that throw very "deep" analysis of playerbase, coop or whatever and get to some very very "deep" conclusion about why it is so are funny as hell.

 

Bottom line is... game wasnt advertised, game was fun and gameplay was good (with flaws obviously) and yet peak numbers are 1 month after "release" (open beta wipe). Everyone waited to check it despite it not being advertised, and then quit as it just wasnt fun. I myself got 4 people to try it, they all quit very quickly. Gameplay is pretty much opposite of what it was in CBT, and blaming anyone but WG for that is just silly.

Standard, neutral players that play games for fun are just staying clear of this game, and those are majority. Ship lovers and history fanboys are minority, and this game decided to cater to them despite being very good for everyone else during CBT and having bright future ahead of it because of that. I as neutral guy who doesnt care about tanks, ships, history, wars or whatever, i prefered WoWs by far during beta (and i played both WoT and WoWs... and invested much more in WoT... with 13-14 T10 tanks back when there were only like 17-18 of them).

Now gameplay is bad, and since i dont care about ship names, history, how famous this ship or that ship is... why play it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,929 posts
7,756 battles
28 minutes ago, genai said:

Ship lovers and history fanboys are minority, and this game decided to cater to them

If that was true then WoWS would have focused on realism rather than being the no brain arcade game that it is.

What this game caters to is the same player segment as those WoT caters to; namely those who don't want to spend time or effort in learning how the game works and who don't care about stats, playing to the best of their abilities, team play and who is only interested in shooting at what they can see on the screen in front of them and at the same time will throw money at the game in order to reach tier 10. WoWS is not a naval warfare game it is nothing more than World Of Tanks on blue grass.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
4,143 posts
9,348 battles
1 hour ago, genai said:

 

Are you sure you played since the start? As far as i know, peak numbers were around 45-46k after wipe. And i didnt even need to check stats, i remember seeing the number top left of the game(and stats confirm that)...

It dropped back to 20s something like 6 months after wipe.

Peak according tho those stats is 45424

 

Concurrent players =! total player count

 

That any game will have a large influx of people that tries the game and leave is a given for any game, doubly so for a f2p game.

That alot will play the game a ton the first few weeks/months, and then turn that activity down to more reasonable levels? Also a given and what you see basicly everywhere else.

What's interesting if you're concerned about the health of the player base, is how long term player count, and activity, pans out. And while the player base isn't huge, by any metrics us players can check it's steadily trending upwards, though not by any amazing amounts.

 

The rest of that post is just more "more people would play if they did it how I want them to do it" with no actual evidence for this being true (or even that the game wouldn't be doing worse).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MASLO]
Beta Tester
663 posts
1,238 battles
50 minutes ago, AgarwaenME said:

 

Concurrent players =! total player count

 

That any game will have a large influx of people that tries the game and leave is a given for any game, doubly so for a f2p game.

That alot will play the game a ton the first few weeks/months, and then turn that activity down to more reasonable levels? Also a given and what you see basicly everywhere else.

What's interesting if you're concerned about the health of the player base, is how long term player count, and activity, pans out. And while the player base isn't huge, by any metrics us players can check it's steadily trending upwards, though not by any amazing amounts.

 

The rest of that post is just more "more people would play if they did it how I want them to do it" with no actual evidence for this being true (or even that the game wouldn't be doing worse).

 

Almost everything you said is not true.

Who said anything about total player count? 45000 was max online at once.

Almost every free to play game actually grows over a long period of time before peaking. And no, almost 0 games that are not advertised and are not actual bought games have peak numbers at release. Even WoT hit peak years after wipe. Same as all other free games.

That is because free games are free and everyone can easily check it and see if they like it, and if they do, they stay. Not so much with WoWs... they check it and leave. Barely any new players stay with the game. Why is that? Because game is fun and enjoyable? Or because they favorite ship is not as strong as they think it should be? I can assure you, vast majority doesnt care about ship names and such crap.

 

And it has nothing to do with how i want them to do it. What i say are facts. Back then people played all classes, whatever had the gameplay they liked. Different people enjoy different things and find different things fun. Playing DD was very different to CAs and both were different to BBs. Now not so much. CAs play almost the same as BBs, long range sniping, just shooting more often and relying on fires. You think standard player who doesnt care about ship names and history would enjoy this now more than what was in CBT? Sure....

 

And there is evidence... Number of lost players and very poor retainment rate of new players. Im really baffled that people actually try to defend how wows is now, and even more baffled by continuous attempts to deny the facts about CBT and how gameplay steadily deteriorated since then. Its obvious for everyone to see.  If it was how i wanted it to be, it wouldnt be like in CBT, it would be even better :P But CBT gameplay was still 10 times better than now.

 

1 hour ago, G01ngToxicCommand0 said:

If that was true then WoWS would have focused on realism rather than being the no brain arcade game that it is.

What this game caters to is the same player segment as those WoT caters to; namely those who don't want to spend time or effort in learning how the game works and who don't care about stats, playing to the best of their abilities, team play and who is only interested in shooting at what they can see on the screen in front of them and at the same time will throw money at the game in order to reach tier 10. WoWS is not a naval warfare game it is nothing more than World Of Tanks on blue grass.

 

Not true at all. Thing is, this is WG, and they have this style of games. Arcade arena fights. And if it was made with same principles as WoT in mind, it would be great, fun game. But what i said is precisely true.

They want to have WoT styled game but they stupidly want to attract fanboys (and seem to be fanboys themselves), and then throw crap like "BB has to delete CAs, because thats what they were made for"  into the game... but disregard that this is not simulation, or realistic game at any means.

 

They want to have their cake and eat it too. If they made realistic simulation game, i would be fine with that way of thinking. But they make arcade game and then destroy it with fanboyism and trying to suck up to ship fanboys too. Effectively game gets worst from both worlds. Class imbalance from reality and ridiculous gameplay that results from cramming those imbalanced ships into same game and making them fight on equal terms, 1vs1, same costs, same profits, same number of lives etc.

 

So yes... them catering to ship fanboys is what destroys this game and gameplay. If they copied everything from WoT, this game would stomp WoT in regards to fun and gameplay, because initially its not camping game, thus already much better foundation than WoT. But alas, we get what we get, trying to have it both ways and ruining it completely. At least in WoT they figured it out quickly, and WoT exploded afterwards. When they balanced classes for different playstyle but at least comparable power (hard to get that, but they did try), so everyone can play, no matter what kind of gameplay they like and still feel powerful and important.

 

For some reason WoWs had that from the start, but then went other way around and made classes so imbalanced and surprise, surprise, it imploded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[L4GG]
Players
1,376 posts
5,487 battles
8 hours ago, Oderisson said:

The problem with WOWS its it competition.

 

And the competition is WOT XD.

 

People try Wot, suddenly WoWs appears, some are interested, and then they will go back to tanks, because they have invested more money in them. If ships came before tanks we would have different trend. Good way for WG was to go on steam with ships, because that is a large untapped market for them.

 

If that's the problem, it's fine.

My first contact with WG was through Warships, WOT I find a little daft didn't really click for me. (gameplay, graphics, etc are kind of hem.)

Warships it's so much better in comparison to WOT, at least for me.

Warplanes, well, I don't really understand the game, very confusion to my likings, with much going on in the same cap. If only it was more like Aces over Europe/Aces over Pacific.

Arena it's ok and fun, but it's a far cry from the original, if you are used to battle formations, battle lines, etc, Arena it's more like a pitched battle with no order whatsoever.

So Warships all the way, and besides I'm too far in it now to go for another at the same level of commitment.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,929 posts
7,756 battles
15 minutes ago, genai said:

 

Almost everything you said is not true.

Who said anything about total player count? 45000 was max online at once.

Almost every free to play game actually grows over a long period of time before peaking. And no, almost 0 games that are not advertised and are not actual bought games have peak numbers at release. Even WoT hit peak years after wipe. Same as all other free games.

That is because free games are free and everyone can easily check it and see if they like it, and if they do, they stay. Not so much with WoWs... they check it and leave. Barely any new players stay with the game. Why is that? Because game is fun and enjoyable? Or because they favorite ship is not as strong as they think it should be? I can assure you, vast majority doesnt care about ship names and such crap.

 

And it has nothing to do with how i want them to do it. What i say are facts. Back then people played all classes, whatever had the gameplay they liked. Different people enjoy different things and find different things fun. Playing DD was very different to CAs and both were different to BBs. Now not so much. CAs play almost the same as BBs, long range sniping, just shooting more often and relying on fires. You think standard player who doesnt care about ship names and history would enjoy this now more than what was in CBT? Sure....

 

And there is evidence... Number of lost players and very poor retainment rate of new players. Im really baffled that people actually try to defend how wows is now, and even more baffled by continuous attempts to deny the facts about CBT and how gameplay steadily deteriorated since then. Its obvious for everyone to see.  If it was how i wanted it to be, it wouldnt be like in CBT, it would be even better :P But CBT gameplay was still 10 times better than now.

 

 

Not true at all. Thing is, this is WG, and they have this style of games. Arcade arena fights. And if it was made with same principles as WoT in mind, it would be great, fun game. But what i said is precisely true.

They want to have WoT styled game but they stupidly want to attract fanboys (and seem to be fanboys themselves), and then throw crap like "BB has to delete CAs, because thats what they were made for"  into the game... but disregard that this is not simulation, or realistic game at any means.

 

They want to have their cake and eat it too. If they made realistic simulation game, i would be fine with that way of thinking. But they make arcade game and then destroy it with fanboyism and trying to suck up to ship fanboys too. Effectively game gets worst from both worlds. Class imbalance from reality and ridiculous gameplay that results from cramming those imbalanced ships into same game and making them fight on equal terms, 1vs1, same costs, same profits, same number of lives etc.

 

So yes... them catering to ship fanboys is what destroys this game and gameplay. If they copied everything from WoT, this game would stomp WoT in regards to fun and gameplay, because initially its not camping game, thus already much better foundation than WoT. But alas, we get what we get, trying to have it both ways and ruining it completely. At least in WoT they figured it out quickly, and WoT exploded afterwards. When they balanced classes for different playstyle but at least comparable power (hard to get that, but they did try), so everyone can play, no matter what kind of gameplay they like and still feel powerful and important.

 

For some reason WoWs had that from the start, but then went other way around and made classes so imbalanced and surprise, surprise, it imploded.

I'm a ship fanboy extraordinaire and I dislike this game to the extend that I have uninstalled it and stopped playing for good because it has nothing to do with naval warfare other than the names and 3D models of the ships. Also WoT is just as stupidly bad as WoWS and can hardly be called fun to play with the exact same issues and bad gameplay and game experience as WoWS has. The only reason I have played 7k battles is because I was stupid and naive enough in believing that Wargaming would make the game better, but no they didn't do that and joke is on me. I don't recall the WoWS game experience in CBT being much better than it is now other than there were more team play due to a more dedicated and interested group of players while now that is completely out the window.

What Wargaming is really really good at is exploiting gambling/gaming psychology and making players spend a great deal of money and that is clear when looking at Wargaming's business model, especially when looking at the power creep and retard proof vehicles and "ships" that has been introduced into the game.

Wargaming's games is not about making good games and players having fun while experiencing a good challenge; no it is only about grinding to tier 10 while making the game experience so frustrating for the players that they will pay through the nose in order to skip to tier 10 or spend money on OP vehicles/"ships" so they can feel superior and the game less frustrating.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
[TOXIC]
Players
3,695 posts
10,594 battles
29 minutes ago, G01ngToxicCommand0 said:

I'm a ship fanboy extraordinaire and I dislike this game to the extend that I have uninstalled it and stopped playing for good because it has nothing to do with naval warfare other than the names and 3D models of the ships. Also WoT is just as stupidly bad as WoWS and can hardly be called fun to play with the exact same issues and bad gameplay and game experience as WoWS has. The only reason I have played 7k battles is because I was stupid and naive enough in believing that Wargaming would make the game better, but no they didn't do that and joke is on me. I don't recall the WoWS game experience in CBT being much better than it is now other than there were more team play due to a more dedicated and interested group of players while now that is completely out the window.

What Wargaming is really really good at is exploiting gambling/gaming psychology and making players spend a great deal of money and that is clear when looking at Wargaming's business model, especially when looking at the power creep and retard proof vehicles and "ships" that has been introduced into the game.

Wargaming's games is not about making good games and players having fun while experiencing a good challenge; no it is only about grinding to tier 10 while making the game experience so frustrating for the players that they will pay through the nose in order to skip to tier 10 or spend money on OP vehicles/"ships" so they can feel superior and the game less frustrating.

Isn't it a waste of everyone's time to keep coming to the Forum and whining how you don't like the game you don't play anymore?

I sincerely advise you to just keep away, not thinking about the game at all - otherwise you're risking a relapse at some point. And we wouldn't want you re-installing this piece of crap game, now would we.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
4,143 posts
9,348 battles
54 minutes ago, genai said:

 

Almost everything you said is not true.

Who said anything about total player count? 45000 was max online at once.

Almost every free to play game actually grows over a long period of time before peaking. And no, almost 0 games that are not advertised and are not actual bought games have peak numbers at release. Even WoT hit peak years after wipe. Same as all other free games.

That is because free games are free and everyone can easily check it and see if they like it, and if they do, they stay. Not so much with WoWs... they check it and leave. Barely any new players stay with the game. Why is that? Because game is fun and enjoyable? Or because they favorite ship is not as strong as they think it should be? I can assure you, vast majority doesnt care about ship names and such crap.

 

And it has nothing to do with how i want them to do it. What i say are facts. Back then people played all classes, whatever had the gameplay they liked. Different people enjoy different things and find different things fun. Playing DD was very different to CAs and both were different to BBs. Now not so much. CAs play almost the same as BBs, long range sniping, just shooting more often and relying on fires. You think standard player who doesnt care about ship names and history would enjoy this now more than what was in CBT? Sure....

 

And there is evidence... Number of lost players and very poor retainment rate of new players. Im really baffled that people actually try to defend how wows is now, and even more baffled by continuous attempts to deny the facts about CBT and how gameplay steadily deteriorated since then. Its obvious for everyone to see.  If it was how i wanted it to be, it wouldnt be like in CBT, it would be even better :P But CBT gameplay was still 10 times better than now.

 

 

 

You invent evidence where you have none. You don't have numbers on player retention, so stop pretending you do.

 

And of course max online players are related to total player count, but as with anything new, people will have a higher activity level at the start. Ie you can have 45k peaks with say, 100k active players, and 25k peaks with 100k slightly less active players (if you did pay attention, we did actually get some minimum semi active player count during some events with community goals). Much like how you see higher peaks during ranked/CW seasons, without this suddenly meaning twice as many players are actively playing, but when you do see a slow but steady increase overall even accounting for events, then you'd have to assume that a fairly large part of your supposed "diminishing" population is playing a lot more to make up for it.

 

As for advertisements, I saw plenty of them, but then.. so what, it's just a massive amount of throwing crap at the wall hoping some will stick, even if none of those actually prove what's better for either the game, or more fun.

 

As for the game changing, simply pretending that the game was better in every way in CBT (or even in OBT and farther) is just silly. The game had massive issues in CBT.

 

You pretend your opinions are facts, and you ignore actual facts. You go "I assure you" in the typical trumpian way, and that just doesn't assure anyone, and you pile on hyperbole that just makes you look even more trumpish. The result is just that your complaints seem entirely childish.

 

The simplest way to put it would be to just go "oh yes, everyone knows that McDonalds has the best food, they have to because they sell so much right?", but that would be as silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,929 posts
7,756 battles
8 minutes ago, eliastion said:

Isn't it a waste of everyone's time to keep coming to the Forum and whining how you don't like the game you don't play anymore?

I sincerely advise you to just keep away, not thinking about the game at all - otherwise you're risking a relapse at some point. And we wouldn't want you re-installing this piece of crap game, now would we.

My mission is to save others from the mistakes I made, you have a problem with that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
[TOXIC]
Players
3,695 posts
10,594 battles
1 hour ago, genai said:

Almost every free to play game actually grows over a long period of time before peaking. And no, almost 0 games that are not advertised and are not actual bought games have peak numbers at release. Even WoT hit peak years after wipe. Same as all other free games.

Only WoWs was actually advertised quite a lot and had a strong synergy in the form of huge playerbase of WoT players that knew it, already had an account for it and were just a download away from checking it out on the "I wonder how WoT with ships looks like" basis... It was not a game that had to build its whole playerbase from the ground up - it got a big starting advantage and just had to offer something different/interesting enough to keep enough of these sightseers and turn them into actual players that stick with the game instead of passing on to the next thing right away.

 

Anybody with half a brain or more could predict that the game would start with a lot of players and then lose a lot of them over the first couple months.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
4,143 posts
9,348 battles
1 minute ago, G01ngToxicCommand0 said:

My mission is to save others from the mistakes I made, you have a problem with that?

 

The only mistake here is your parents.

  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
624 posts
2,032 battles
1 hour ago, AgarwaenME said:

As for the game changing, simply pretending that the game was better in every way in CBT (or even in OBT and farther) is just silly. The game had massive issues in CBT.

I don't agree it was hugely fun and classes were balanced it also promoted teamwork , DDs didn't have to contend with 80% Domination games they also had an important role of scouting out SF CA/CLs , CVs were not as potent as there are now as ships actually used the AA skills , Remember when Cleveland was king?, If you were lone BB you were a dead BB.

 

Judging by Wows steam launch you would have thought that we would have seen a spike in numbers but it didn't happen , Currently Wows sits at a 74% average to meagre rating in steam which isn't very good they continue to pump out premium ships while ignoring game mechanics that should have been fixed a long-time ago like gimmicks in MM or Power-Creeped silver line ships the extra DD in domination games.

 

The total domination of battleships has happened not because people like to play battleships but because WG buffed them with the key removal of SF and IJN Torp boats so in effect WG have contributed in breaking there own game imho and that's a fact because it happened no proof needed.

 

In CBT you would see teams full of CA/DDs with a CV and a couple of BBs now all you see is 90 BBs in the queue and you tell me the game is better than CBT?. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×