shaeberle84 Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 (edited) The alliances system can serve pretty well as a tool to calculate the active player base, both for the whole server, each nation, and for each of the (two) alliances. I did a quick calculation on how many players have voted this turn. After the new alliances system has settled for a number of rounds, it can be assumed that especially the active players still cast their vote. They are involved in politics and rely on alliances to work if they want to have coordinated battles with their allies. I assume every player has 10 votes as every experienced captain should have the highest rank by now. I also assume that active players either all vote, or at least that the share of active players who vote is evenly distributed across nations. In the second case the number of active players will be higher than estimated, but the relative numbers between nations should be similar. On october 5, 2016, at 2 pm, the following numbers of players have been calculated: Espana: 70 France: 70 Great Britain: 120 Vereinidge Provincien: 70 Danmark Norge: 95 Sverige: 115 US: 40 Note: I cannot see the numbers from the pirates, so these have to be added. From these numbers, the following can be deducted. (1) Great Britain was said to be a huge nation. It is not when it comes to active players. (2) Sverige was said to be a tiny nation. It is not, when it comes to active players. These are extreme cases.These numbers significantly differ from the ones cast at the beginning of the patch. At the beginning of the patch, the votes cast for Great Britain vastly outnumbered those from Sverige. (a) Fewer players cast their vote in total. (b ) Fewer casual players cast their vote, relative to active players. Hence, Great Britain is a vastly casual player nation and Sverige is a hardcore player nation. (3) The US is really the smallest nation on the server. This has been discussed and veteran players have had this feeling for a long time, but know it is official. Turning back to the results: Total active player base (without pirates): 580 When we compare this number to the steam charts: http://steamcharts.com/app/311310#48h we can see that about half of the players who have logged in during the last 30 days have cast a vote and can be considered active players following this definition. This is a large share of total players. In other words: the game has relatively few casual players. Looking at diplomacy: Active Players of the USA/GB/VP alliance: 230 Active Players of the Espana/France/Danmark/Sverige alliance: 350 Here we can see the skewness of the ongoing or let us say finished coalition war. Not however, that with Sverige on the other side in the previous coalition war, the skewness was in the other direction, at least when we ignore the pirates, who are said to be more friendly to Danmark players and their allies. From my perspective, these number make sense. I have always felt that VP can only fight one enemy at once, be it France, Espana or Sverige and this makes sense when you look at the player bases for these nations. Similarly, it is very difficult for GB to fight a two front war against Espana and Danmark/France/Sverige without further help, e.g. from the US. Also, Sverige has a very hard time defending against both Danmark and France. It can beat one of the two, tough. To sum up, I think the alliances voting system is a good way to get information on player activity and diplomatic balance. Edited October 5, 2016 by shaeberle84 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Konali89 Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 Not sure if i can agree. I myself for example dont even bother to vote anymore. And with me i know quite a few more that do not really see the point in it. Basically this system is a buddy system, all other nations will be at war with you regardless of their WAR or ENEMY status. So when i see the alliance is going to be renewed i dont even bother to vote. That makes me believe that your numbers are not really representative but a small indication. Would be cool to see if such an experiment would be done every voting round, it would become more reliable imho. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaeberle84 Posted October 5, 2016 Author Share Posted October 5, 2016 Not sure if i can agree. I myself for example dont even bother to vote anymore. And with me i know quite a few more that do not really see the point in it. Basically this system is a buddy system, all other nations will be at war with you regardless of their WAR or ENEMY status. So when i see the alliance is going to be renewed i dont even bother to vote. That makes me believe that your numbers are not really representative but a small indication. Would be cool to see if such an experiment would be done every voting round, it would become more reliable imho. I also assume that the share of active players who vote is evenly distributed across nations. In this case the number of active players will be higher than estimated, but the relative numbers between nations should be similar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CeltiberoCaesar Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 (edited) We need REAL numbers from devs... At least relative numbers... But yeah, this will be ignored...again. Edited October 5, 2016 by CeltiberoCaesar 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajffighter86 Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 (edited) 40/10 = 4. One of the US guys must have ranked up, good job man. Interestingly enough, the Swedes thought they were balancing the server by joining the other side. Edited October 5, 2016 by ajffighter86 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tac Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 40 US = Pretty sure it's 1 US guy and 39 of brogsitter's Alts. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sveno Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 You need to take into account that Sweden has a broadly setup council, leading to streamlined votes to date. That might skew your readout for active players a lot. Other countries might have not so streamlined votes canceling each other out. I agree on Sweden still being relative active to date, but also our active players are starting to login less, due to the missing player driven content (RvR) close to the patch. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajffighter86 Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 40 US = Pretty sure it's 1 US guy and 39 of brogsitter's Alts. Ah, that explains how both of our alliances expired with Dutch and British. Guess we have to take over the world by ourselves then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 Haven't actually bothered to vote ever since the first 4-5 times, and I reckon lots of players - active or not - are in the same boat. Currently it's not about changing anything, it's just about maintenance. So apart from the existing problems with using voting results as data (e.g. war and alliance votes cancelling eachother out), doing so at this stage seems even more dubious. I was shown a spreadsheet made by some people who did some extensive data collection based on the first couple of rounds of voting (with fewer and fewer players voting each round, no surprise there), but it's up to them whether they want to publish it or not. Naturally the Swedes are eager to vote since they're the ones who were targeted by hostile flag trading from their allies' ports when there's was a gap in the alliance rounds. Simple as that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tac Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 Ah, that explains how both of our alliances expired with Dutch and British. Guess we have to take over the world by ourselves then. Mind you I could be wrong it could be 38 Alts. I have 't voted since the second time I think , I don,t think there's much chance of alliances switching unless you get a similar Swedish brain fart. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancella Dutch de Wildt Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 (edited) You need to take into account that Sweden has a broadly setup council, leading to streamlined votes to date. That might skew your readout for active players a lot. Other countries might have not so streamlined votes canceling each other out. I agree on Sweden still being relative active to date, but also our active players are starting to login less, due to the missing player driven content (RvR) close to the patch. I already was wondering why Sweden 'hated' the Dutch so much (numbers deep in red quite often), while the Dutch in majority still vote in favour of you guys Edited October 5, 2016 by Dutch Langella 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajffighter86 Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 I already was wondering why Sweden 'hated' the Dutch so much (numbers deep in red quite often), while the Dutch in majority still vote in favour of you guys I don't think they hate you, but clearly the Swedes either over-estimated the fighting capability of the British, or underestimated their own strength. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knobby Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 This is pointless. The numbers you see are the net votes! 1000 votes for war with nation, 800 votes for alliance with nation will only display 200 votes instead of 1800! and i think there will be a lot of votes cancelling each other out... most ppl seem to not get the alliance system as i see many votes cast for combinations that are clearly impossible with current rules (and thus a totally wasted vote...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaeberle84 Posted October 5, 2016 Author Share Posted October 5, 2016 This is pointless. The numbers you see are the net votes! 1000 votes for war with nation, 800 votes for alliance with nation will only display 200 votes instead of 1800! and i think there will be a lot of votes cancelling each other out... most ppl seem to not get the alliance system as i see many votes cast for combinations that are clearly impossible with current rules (and thus a totally wasted vote...) You can assume that the share of players voting in opposite directions is evenly distributed across nations. In this case the number of active players will be higher than estimated, but the relative numbers between nations should be similar. There might be suspicion for this assumption, for example that the Sverige players are better coordinated than the Dutch or others. In this case, the numbers will be a measure of active players weighted by the degree of coordination. Example: 5 Dutch players, 2 vote in opposite directions results in 3 counted active dutch player. 3 Sverige players are coordinated and vote in the same direction, hence counted as 3 active sverige players. I would suggest that in this case the number of ships you can expect to show up in port battles is three sverige, four dutch players. Hence you would undererstimate dutch turnout. However, counting every dutch vote caste (=5 players) would overestimate the active player turnout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bach Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 (edited) To the OP: Nice compiling of the data. I have done my own and we pretty much agree on the conclusions with one possible exception. I weigh in time zone effects. This is how I see your data mixed with mine. Brits spread 120 about 33.5/66.5 NA/Euro time zones. Meanwhile USA fields nearly all of its 40 NA time zone and Dutch nearly all its 70 in Euro. Spain, France, Dane are also nearly all its 235 ( by your numbers) Euro time. Sweden seems split 20/80% NA/Euro. So roughy 23/92 respectively Pirates are a wild card but I would argue their split is 30/70% NA/Euro. So weighted by time zone it's more like: Brits, USA, VP = 80 NA and 150 Euro SV, France, Dane, Spain = 23 NA and 327 Euro The current port battle timers strongly favor the Eastern Antilles & Spain alliance. That should change with the new conquest system. Theoretically Brit,USA, VP should be able to then put more of its stronger NA zone presence into play. Edited October 5, 2016 by Bach 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loco Bandito Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 Don't forget cross server voting. People from pve and PvP2 can come got on pvp1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Texas Sir Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 Don't forget cross server voting. People from pve and PvP2 can come got on pvp1. So what nations want our votes? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikodemus Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 While close on the numbers i think Brits have more then that. (just from seeing the people around KPR) . But i don't think you can take that into account for RvR part of the game. Brits have been lucky ( or unlucky in my point of view) of having a strong area well protected by the RvR players, that has made it safe haven for the more PvE focus players in the game. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lytse Pier Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 40 US = Pretty sure it's 1 US guy and 39 of brogsitter's Alts. Hahahaha. Most likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loco Bandito Posted October 5, 2016 Share Posted October 5, 2016 Selling my votes for 1 labor contract. PST with offers. Lol 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agooselooseabootdishoose Posted October 6, 2016 Share Posted October 6, 2016 prehaps some people just dont vote often? i know a few people who dont. sometimes i forget to check too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pelennor Posted October 6, 2016 Share Posted October 6, 2016 Espana: 70 France: 70 Great Britain: 120 Vereinidge Provincien: 70 Danmark Norge: 95 Sverige: 115 US: 40 Note: I cannot see the numbers from the pirates, so these have to be added. From these numbers, the following can be deducted. (1) Great Britain was said to be a huge nation. It is not when it comes to active players. (2) Sverige was said to be a tiny nation. It is not, when it comes to active players. Such counting was relevant in the very first rounds, now it's not for obvious reasons, main one is you can't measure the participation rate. Honestly, your system gives you SWE with almost equal number of players than GB, and that doesn't ring you a bell... Most of the clans have made some charts following voting system, and I find their results much more accurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrdoomed Posted October 6, 2016 Share Posted October 6, 2016 There needs to be a different system than voting for the reasons mentioned above, alts etc, but what should it be ? I would prefer some sort of hostility / voting system. For instance if US players sink british ships in ow the server would keep points. X amount for pve and y for pvp. Mix this with voting to determine war/peace/neutral / Allied . This way nations that are far far apart have a much greater chance of bring viewed as neutral and all players actions ( that take more time than logging in an alt to vote) will help determine the status of relations. Obviously thats a rough draft idea but something more along that lined. Hell since pirates are always at war maybe they could somehow be counted towards a different nations war status do to " mistaken identity " or something. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CptEdwardKenway Posted October 7, 2016 Share Posted October 7, 2016 Good work. I would like to see more stats of the voting rounds. You can also see how balanced it is at the moment. Pirates should be count to danish side with I guess a playerbase of around 70-100 which would give the eastern alliance a 2-1 advantage on numbers. Plus british nation is a nation with most casual players. Most of them are not involved in any RvR for many reasons but you can bet they are voting too. So this gives the eastern alliance an even bigger advantage in numbers and you can easily see it on the map too. One side is only defending and one side attacking. It shows also clearly what I thought from the very beginning that the switch of swedish nation had a huge impact in disbalancing this war. But it shows more it was not about "balancing" but more be friendly with neighbours since they are obviously outnumbered by danes/france. Would really like to see further stats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kloothommel Posted October 7, 2016 Share Posted October 7, 2016 (edited) On 10/6/2016 at 11:36 PM, CptEdwardKenway said: Pirates should be count to danish side with I guess a playerbase of around 70-100 which would give the eastern alliance a 2-1 advantage on numbers. The pirates that roam the Danish waters at CS beg to differ. The pirates are definitly hostile towards D-N. Check your facts and don't assume things. Edited November 9, 2016 by Henry d'Esterre Darby Leave real life politics out of this please. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts