Guild Wars 2

OriOri.8724:

We’ll just have to agree to disagree then. 110 thousand people in the sample size is absolutely huge, especially when you consider the number of players that play GW2. According to ArenaNet themselves, 7 million accounts had been created when HoT launched (link below), even if we assume that number has risen to 8 million, we still have a huge sample size relative to the total population. Absolutely huge. Considering the fact that GW2Efficiency statistics can be deemed a convenience sample since they only count those who came out to GW2Efficiency (I think that’s perfectly fair), the size is huge and is therefore statistically significant.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/10/23/guild-wars-2-hits-7-million-players-as-expansion-launches

You’re still completely missing the point. As I thoroughly explained, a large sample size is not a valid justification for statistical significance. You’re abusing these terms to justify absolute garbage conclusions.

Edit: If you want to make some garbage claims about how the fact that there’s a lot of people on GW2E that raid and that means there’s a lot of people that raid, go ahead. But the moment you start trying to use statistics and statistics terms to justify your statements, you must comply with the mathematical standards of what statistics means. You don’t just get to play fast and loose with terminology to try and make your statements sound more official, despite the example set by the current US gov.

Well considering I never did anything but give baselines in this thread regardless I don’t see why you’re getting so worked up over this. The chances of GW2Efficiency being as biased as some people in this thread claim it is, is astronomically low due to its comprehensive features and amazing lack of advertising. Using it as a baseline is fine for all intents and purposes.

OriOri.8724:

Well considering I never did anything but give baselines in this thread regardless I don’t see why you’re getting so worked up over this. The chances of GW2Efficiency being as biased as some people in this thread claim it is, is astronomically low due to its comprehensive features and amazing lack of advertising. Using it as a baseline is fine for all intents and purposes.

And that’s where you’re wrong. You’re making this absurd claim about GW2E based on absolutely nothing substantive. Comprehensive features means….nothing? Or it might mean it’s more attractive to raiders, so there’s a bias. Or it might mean it’s more attractive to non-raiders because they have a broader focus, bias the other way. Lack of advertising means….nothing? Or it might mean that less hardcore players are unlikely to find it, so there’s a bias.

zealex.9410:

Khyan.7039:

zealex.9410:

Ayrilana.1396:

Whether it’s large, small, growing, or not growing; really has nothing to do with its accessibility. If players want to get into raids then they can do what a lot of others did and join up with others like them with the goal to succeed. quite. Number of raiders are already making it easier by offering training runs.

consider the easy mode idea.

Easy modes are already here… At least for Wing 4. Try normal mode then switch to challenge and see the difference.

Anet don’t want to clearly say there is an easy & hard mode but in fact it’s already here. Maybe not “easy” more “normal” for, at least, the last boss, but it’s really casual friendly. challenge mode need a bit more focus and reflexion.

Paradoxaly, you want an easy mode, but in fact people will be interested by the easy version of the content and not the normal. So it doesn’t change your issue, that you want more people.

you make a mistake here
the difficulty of the raid is the same and one the normal mode cm is something you can go if you really want to experience it but sadly its just a one time experience.

The “i want an easy mode arguement” at some points make no sense because ppl say they dont have time to bash their heads against a boss and others say i can find 5-9 ppl which making the encounter easier doesnt nececerally fix the player number issue, if a boss isnt dying in under an hour of practice at raid release then it takes too long and ppl cant give that much time….and because of that ppl supposedly cant find more ppl to raid with.

I don’t see any link with the initial discussion. I’m against easy mode as far as I know btw. But it’s already there.

Same difficulty? I don’t think so. W4B2 is not the same at all when you activate the mote, for example.

OriOri.8724:

We’ll just have to agree to disagree then. 110 thousand people in the sample size is absolutely huge, especially when you consider the number of players that play GW2. According to ArenaNet themselves, 7 million accounts had been created when HoT launched (link below), even if we assume that number has risen to 8 million, we still have a huge sample size relative to the total population. Absolutely huge. Considering the fact that GW2Efficiency statistics can be deemed a convenience sample since they only count those who came out to GW2Efficiency (I think that’s perfectly fair), the size is huge and is therefore statistically significant.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/10/23/guild-wars-2-hits-7-million-players-as-expansion-launches

7 million accounts created is not the same as current active players or monthly concurrency numbers.

Edit- Reference quote if the above sentence is not understood… “In January 2014, Blizzard announced that more than 100 million accounts had been created over the game’s lifetime.”

…We all know that game doesn’t have more than 100 million players actively playing. Box sales and account created numbers are for show, but they don’t represent what’s going on in-game.

http://fortune.com/2015/11/24/areanet-investing-in-esports/

““Guild Wars 2 has proven pretty resilient historically, with about 1.5 million monthly actives,” SuperData Research CEO Joost van Dreunen says. “Since it switched to free-to-play in late August, Guild Wars 2’s monthly active user base has doubled to 3.1 million (October 2015). "

http://global.ncsoft.com/global/ir/earnings.aspx

Q4 2015 ncsoft conference call…

GW2

“To talk about the Guild Wars 2 performance, it is weaker than what we have expected." According to Ncsoft the reason lies in the conversion from play for free to the paid expansion. This conversion rate is not as high as expected/hoped by NCsoft. The amount of gem sales and item sales versus active players is ok. “ but it is more the issue of the conversion to the paid expansion pack that we have not seen the level (of sales) we have hoped”

…HoT didn’t sell well and conversions by free players was weak, so that means there is a percentage of players who do not own HoT or have access to raids…

This whole discussion about gw2efficiency is pointless. Suppose for the shake of argument that gw2efficiency is 100% accurate of the entire population. Which statistic would you use to find out the raiding population?

maddoctor.2738:

Which statistic would you use to find out the raiding population?

Relevant numbers provided by Anet (and yes, I’m aware that they could fake these ^^).
I would consider a boss pull as a serious sign for a player being a raider since it wouldn’t make sense to go into a raid and pull a boss for no reason in significant numbers that would falsify the result. But I’m sure there are many other opportunities to measure the raid population.

Being a raider is more a selfimposed title than anything.
But LI, magnetite shards and such are trackable. As well as achievements.

Swagger.1459:

OriOri.8724:

We’ll just have to agree to disagree then. 110 thousand people in the sample size is absolutely huge, especially when you consider the number of players that play GW2. According to ArenaNet themselves, 7 million accounts had been created when HoT launched (link below), even if we assume that number has risen to 8 million, we still have a huge sample size relative to the total population. Absolutely huge. Considering the fact that GW2Efficiency statistics can be deemed a convenience sample since they only count those who came out to GW2Efficiency (I think that’s perfectly fair), the size is huge and is therefore statistically significant.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/10/23/guild-wars-2-hits-7-million-players-as-expansion-launches

7 million accounts created is not the same as current active players or monthly concurrency numbers.

Edit- Reference quote if the above sentence is not understood… “In January 2014, Blizzard announced that more than 100 million accounts had been created over the game’s lifetime.”

…We all know that game doesn’t have more than 100 million players actively playing. Box sales and account created numbers are for show, but they don’t represent what’s going on in-game.

http://fortune.com/2015/11/24/areanet-investing-in-esports/

““Guild Wars 2 has proven pretty resilient historically, with about 1.5 million monthly actives,” SuperData Research CEO Joost van Dreunen says. “Since it switched to free-to-play in late August, Guild Wars 2’s monthly active user base has doubled to 3.1 million (October 2015). "

http://global.ncsoft.com/global/ir/earnings.aspx

Q4 2015 ncsoft conference call…

GW2

“To talk about the Guild Wars 2 performance, it is weaker than what we have expected." According to Ncsoft the reason lies in the conversion from play for free to the paid expansion. This conversion rate is not as high as expected/hoped by NCsoft. The amount of gem sales and item sales versus active players is ok. “ but it is more the issue of the conversion to the paid expansion pack that we have not seen the level (of sales) we have hoped”

…HoT didn’t sell well and conversions by free players was weak, so that means there is a percentage of players who do not own HoT or have access to raids…

Was that from 2015? As if 2 years ago?

Valik Shin.9027:

This is 100% true. Without establishing what a Raider is you can’t say who big the community is

Easy. Established raider should have at least minimal number of LI that is usually demanded by pug raids. Right now its somewhere about 50.

Rednik.3809:

Right now its somewhere about 50.

That’s completely bs and you know it.

50 is never ever the average minimal number of LI for pugs.

Go back to facts instead of throwing in fake news to underline your personal feeling.

Vinceman.4572:

Rednik.3809:

Right now its somewhere about 50.

That’s completely bs and you know it.

50 is never ever the average minimal number of LI for pugs.

Go back to facts instead of throwing in fake news to underline your personal feeling.

lol this ^^

Escorts ask for 50 maybe, anything beyond that is 100-150, so required average today is definitely NOT 50.

Vinceman.4572:

That’s completely bs and you know it.

50 is never ever the average minimal number of LI for pugs.

Go back to facts instead of throwing in fake news to underline your personal feeling.

I took minimal requirement for VG and Escort, but if you want to move the plank up to 100+ then go ahead.
So, instead of 8.5% we have 5.5% raiders.

People would use any numbers they are given to prove or disprove pretty much anything.
The actual numbers could be interpreted as a good number of raiders or a very shockingly low number of raiders. Entirely depending on your point of view and your personal bias.

Actually, if there is one thing that would interest me then that’s the comparison of the individual investment returns of each game mode. Obviously rather unlikely as it would be very hard to calculate this accurately and since most players are interested in multiple modes.
An active player group of about 5-10% of the entire population could be quite profitable if the raids do not require a lot of work or it could be a huge loss. We can only guess for now.
However, we are dealing with a business here. They will have their reasons to work on raids wether you like it or not. It might not even be a focus to make raids accuessible at all but rather a way to give this niche group of players some content to their liking.

Rednik.3809:

Vinceman.4572:

That’s completely bs and you know it.

50 is never ever the average minimal number of LI for pugs.

Go back to facts instead of throwing in fake news to underline your personal feeling.

I took minimal requirement for VG and Escort, but if you want to move the plank up to 100+ then go ahead.
So, instead of 8.5% we have 5.5% raiders.

That raises another question. Should people that are doing escort on regular basis, but haven’t managed to kill VG, be considered to be raiders?

You can also be a raider without any LI if you are constantly failing. Not very likely but possible. ^^

And sure, I would call people that are doing escort on a regular basis raiders because Anet developed this encounter for the raid.
I know many others will disagree, it clearly shows it’s not easy to determine who is a raider and who not.

Vinceman.4572:

You can also be a raider without any LI if you are constantly failing.

You can also be a raider with a single LI if you started raiding last week and killed VG on your first day. And a billion other things that make LI a terrible statistic to measure raiders and non-raiders.

Rednik.3809:

So, instead of 8.5% we have 5.5% raiders.

Even if there was an agreement of who is considered a raider or not, by counting LI for example, it’s not enough to give us accurate statistics. So, let’s assume that players with 100+ LI are the “raiders”, what does that 5.5% mean exactly? What’s the 100% you compare it with? All the registered accounts?

To have an accurate statistic you’d need to remove players without Heart of Thorns, they can’t even access the Raid.
You’d also need to remove players who stopped playing Guild Wars 2 in the first month after the expansion was released, so before the Raid was even released.
Maybe remove players who don’t even have an elite spec since it’s mostly elite specs that are needed in Raids.
You’d probably need to remove players with low play time because they are highly unlikely to have the experience, or the gear, to enter the Raid in the first place.
Good luck getting those statistics.

Getting an accurate percentage of Raiders is nearly impossible and getting the percentage of what to compare it against is equally impossible.

I cannot give a correct number, but i can give a hint about the percentage value of players, who are raiding.
Gw2efficency has actuell about ca. 112 000 players, who are using it. If you look at the percentage value of players with legendary insight, then you get atleast a hint about the number of raiders.

( notice, that people, who are using it are probably longtime gw2 players, because a newbie will more often not use a tool like this)

About 70 % of the efficiency-users have zero li. The never tried or atleast never killed a raidboss. ( about 78 400 players)

The highest 80 % of the player base has 4 li (legendary insight). 4li means nothing. They tried maybe escort and stopped to play raids after it.

The highest 10% of the playerbase with li in their inventory/bank have up to 35 li (new to raids, but they maybe continoue to play raids)
( about 11 000 ppl)

The highest 5% of the playerbase with li have about 130 li. They should be raiding now some months atleast, or with breaks over a longer time.
(about 5500 people).

Dont forget: This is not the whole playerbase from gw2. Also we dont know, how many accounts in this statistic are active or inactive. Somebody with 200 li can also be someone, who stopped playing gw2.
But remember: People, who are using gw2efficiency are probably not just newbies, but more often veterans of the playerbase.

So the percentage value of the whole playerbase compared to gw2efficiency should be even lower.

error in measurement:

-second ( third…) accounts: one person has two or more accounts registered at gw2efficiency

-not every player is interested/ knows about efficiency. People using using such tools are most likly persons, who are investing more time into gw2 or atleast are more often interested in it.

-gw2efficiency doesnt make a difference between inactive or active accounts

Was an interesting read on the gw2efficiency debate. I have often wondered about those numbers. I have no idea who is right. What I have found the more serious players tend to use it more so than those who are not. But I don’t get out much so can only make that comment from listening to guildies talk.

worminator.5174:

error in measurement

You forgot to exclude those who didn’t buy Heart of Thorns from the total.
You forgot to exclude those who stopped playing Heart of Thorns before the release of Raids.
You forgot to exclude those who do not have an elite spec unlocked yet.
You forgot to exclude new players with little play time that do not even have Exotic gear.

There are more but I’ll stop here.

maddoctor.2738:

worminator.5174:

error in measurement

You forgot to exclude those who didn’t buy Heart of Thorns from the total.
You forgot to exclude those who stopped playing Heart of Thorns before the release of Raids.
You forgot to exclude those who do not have an elite spec unlocked yet.
You forgot to exclude new players with little play time that do not even have Exotic gear.

There are more but I’ll stop here.

Why did i forgot them? I just showed the number of players (using gw2e as one of the only statistic we have access to), who played raid content. Those without hots (without elite specs, little play time, stopped playing (i mentioned inactive players by the way)) of course never played raids. Why? they are locked for them. Whats your point here? Even people without hots can be part of gw2e or the whole player base. But that was never the point. Those you mentioned are those, who have zero li. I mentioned it.
The Threadopener asked, if the raid community is small or big. I showed, that we have some hints, that the raid community is small, maybe not more von 10 to 20% of the playerbase, maybe even less than 10 % .
Bring something constructive to the discussion or think atleast twice before you waste our time.

Oh i also forgot all people who lost their access to the internet. This must be your next point.
But hey, i will stop here.

maddoctor.2738:

worminator.5174:

error in measurement

You forgot to exclude those who didn’t buy Heart of Thorns from the total.
You forgot to exclude those who stopped playing Heart of Thorns before the release of Raids.
You forgot to exclude those who do not have an elite spec unlocked yet.
You forgot to exclude new players with little play time that do not even have Exotic gear.

There are more but I’ll stop here.

None of those need to be excluded (well, except those that stopped playing, obviously). As long as they are active, they remain part of the community, and should be counted.

The original question didn’t go into the reasons why someone might not raid, only about the relative size of raiders compared to the whole community.

Astralporing.1957:

maddoctor.2738:

worminator.5174:

error in measurement

You forgot to exclude those who didn’t buy Heart of Thorns from the total.
You forgot to exclude those who stopped playing Heart of Thorns before the release of Raids.
You forgot to exclude those who do not have an elite spec unlocked yet.
You forgot to exclude new players with little play time that do not even have Exotic gear.

There are more but I’ll stop here.

None of those need to be excluded (well, except those that stopped playing, obviously). As long as they are active, they remain part of the community, and should be counted.

The original question didn’t go into the reasons why someone might not raid, only about the relative size of raiders compared to the whole community.

And not all Raiders use Gw2 Efficiency and that all Gw2 Efficiency users are Raiders, to think that they do is a complete farce, so trying to use a subset of numbers of an unknown total subset number of an even larger unknown total number won’t get anyone anywhere, and no accurate estimations can be derived from it. All that those numbers show how many accounts active and not have Gw2 Efficiency accounts and how many of those players active or not attempted raids and not, they prove and disprove absolutely nothing else.

So until Anet is completely transparent with numbers or percentiles of active accounts no one will know and are just fabricating numbers to try to reinforce their bias one way or the other. The only thing we know is that Raids have exceeded the Targe Audience population size expectations of Anet, but no hard numbers.

BlaqueFyre.5678:

The only thing we know is that Raids have exceeded the Targe Audience population size expectations of Anet

Which also tells us nothing, really, since we don’t really know what these expectations were. For all we know they might have had a really low one.

If you don’t remember, they almost always say that they are excited about player response. Even when, as we learn later, that response wasn’t all that good.

worminator.5174:

Why did i forgot them? I just showed the number of players (using gw2e as one of the only statistic we have access to), who played raid content.

Knowing how many players are raiding over the entire GW2 population is a completely worthless statistic. Context is always important in statistics. Of course those you forgot have 0 LI but if they don’t have access to Raids then it’s meaningless to add them to the total, the funny thing is you used gw2eff to find out the Raiders and while there are more than enough statistics to find out those you forgot and remove them, you didn’t, just to show a fake number.

The funniest part in your biased analysis is that you refuse to remove those who can’t count from the total and yet you used a RANDOM number of LI for your percentage of Raiders. First you use a random 130 LI to prove who is raider, and then you don’t make any changes to the total, how about you make zero changes to both to be fair? And if you really want to be fair you should count players with a single LI, that’s 30% of the population btw.

You can find many interesting statistics if you want to compare other parts of the game with the entire population.

66% of the players are still “left” playing the game (judging by Unbound Magic)
30% have at least 1 LI
28% run at least one dungeon path in their life
27% reached T4 fractals
15% reached level 100 in Fractals

Some context is always nice. And if you don’t use some random number of LI while not touching the total the results aren’t as you expected.

Astralporing.1957:

The original question didn’t go into the reasons why someone might not raid, only about the relative size of raiders compared to the whole community.

And that’s a completely useless metric. If the expansion wasn’t good enough to convince players to buy it, it has nothing to do with Raid accessibility. If the expansion wasn’t good enough to grab the attention of players and they left soon after starting, that also has zero to do with Raid accessibility.

The original question asked if the Raid community is growing or not. Got something to say about that?

maddoctor.2738:

Astralporing.1957:

The original question didn’t go into the reasons why someone might not raid, only about the relative size of raiders compared to the whole community.

And that’s a completely useless metric. If the expansion wasn’t good enough to convince players to buy it, it has nothing to do with Raid accessibility.

Maybe. Maybe not. You don’t know if some of those people would not have bought expac if raid accessibility was better. If they cared about raids well enough, they would likely have bought it for that alone. I know some people did just that, even while disliking HoT in general.

Besides, again, that’s not what the question was about. As i read it, OP wanted Anet to release numbers showing that raid community is thriving and is so big that all raid opponents should shut up.

maddoctor.2738:

If the expansion wasn’t good enough to grab the attention of players and they left soon after starting, that also has zero to do with Raid accessibility.

I specifically mentioned those that stopped playing completely in my post, didn’t you notice?

None of those need to be excluded (well, except those that stopped playing, obviously).

And those that merely stopped playing HoT, but continued to play the rest of the game, likely weren’t interested in raids for some reason too. It might have had something about accessibility, or it might not. You don’t really know. And since you don’t know, you can’t just exclude them from the picture.

maddoctor.2738:

The original question asked if the Raid community is growing or not.

That was part of the question – and, incidentally, excluding some groups of players from the equation doesn’t change the answer for this one in the slightest, so not sure why would you want to do that if that was really all it was all about.

Though, actually, for that question alone gw2eff might be useful (but only if we could have access to achival data, or if someone kept checking it over time).

With that, you could create growth curves for different LI thresholds, which might tell us something. Or it might not, but at least it would be better than trying to estimate raiding community size compared to whole.

Astralporing.1957:

You don’t know if some of those people would not have bought expac if raid accessibility was better.

Because they knew what the Raid accessibility would be like when the expansion was released…

I specifically mentioned those that stopped playing completely in my post, didn’t you notice?

Did you also count them and removed them from the total? The problem wasn’t about not tweaking the total, but more about tweaking the Raiders by choosing a number of LI like 130 while keeping the total the same. Why not be fair and use 1 LI with the total, since you don’t know when those players got that 1 LI, what if players started raiding very recently? To use your own words:

And since you don’t know, you can’t just exclude them from the picture.

And since you don’t know, you can’t use 130 LI for your data, but rather 1 LI.

Though, actually, for that question alone gw2eff might be useful (but only if we could have access to achival data, or if someone kept checking it over time).

Although the site itself doesn’t have archival data, I do. I’ll go find them and post them here

Raids are always a minority activity, but so are dungeons and anything that isn’t WvW and open world PvE zergs.

Doesn’t mean non-zerg content should be neglected. The appeal in GW2 is that there’s content for everybody.

When HoT released, casual players received 4 large, highly developed maps with multiple interesting event chains, on top of the adventures and jumping puzzles.

Raiders had to wait 4-5 months in between raid wings. Fractal runners had to wait 3+ years to start seeing new fractals.

There’s no favoritism in development for raids and dungeons. Most of the content is still open world PvE, look at the Living Story releases.

Raiders have to do open world PvE and WvW to get legendaries; raids are useless for legendary weapons, and are only getting some ugly legendary armor that only fits on humans and female norn (since male norns are deformed and everything humanoid looks hideous on them).

Found it! Meh it’s from January 3rd, 2017 so not really old but here it goes:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/dungeons/Raid-Normal-Hard-Mode/first#post6453090

January 3rd, 2017
Everyone: 29%
0-500h: 3%
500-1000h: 11%
1000-2000h: 25.5%
2000-4000h: 44%
4000h+: 61.5%

Friday 17th, 2017 (1 month later!)
Everyone: 30%
0-500h: 3%
500-1000h: 11%
1000-2000h: 25.5%
2000-4000h: 43.5%
4000h+: 61.5%

The everyone statistic is 1% up. The 2000-4000h statistic is 0.5% down, everything else looks the same.

I might have older ones that I didn’t post on the forums. Now I’ll bookmark this and probably do an archive every month to see how it grows.

maddoctor.2738:

Astralporing.1957:

You don’t know if some of those people would not have bought expac if raid accessibility was better.

Because they knew what the Raid accessibility would be like when the expansion was released…

Oh, come on, it has been over a year since HoT now. It’s not like the decision to buy HoT had to be made before launch.

maddoctor.2738:

I specifically mentioned those that stopped playing completely in my post, didn’t you notice?

Did you also count them and removed them from the total?

No, because, as you know well, i don’t have enough data to do that. (i believe i mentioned how gw2eff is not that really helpful for most of statistical questions, didn’t i?)

maddoctor.2738:

The problem wasn’t about not tweaking the total, but more about tweaking the Raiders by choosing a number of LI like 130 while keeping the total the same.

Oh, i agree about that part of your post – the definition of a “raider” is definitely different for everyone here, and without agreeing on it first we can’t really have a meaningful discussion about size of the raider community.

maddoctor.2738:

Why not be fair and use 1 LI with the total, since you don’t know when those players got that 1 LI, what if players started raiding very recently?

See above.

maddoctor.2738:

Though, actually, for that question alone gw2eff might be useful (but only if we could have access to achival data, or if someone kept checking it over time).

Although the site itself doesn’t have archival data, I do. I’ll go find them and post them here

Cool. We might try to make something out of them. There’s a lot of factors included that could possibly impact the results, but at least some trends should be visible.

maddoctor.2738:

I might have older ones that I didn’t post on the forums. Now I’ll bookmark this and probably do an archive every month to see how it grows.

You might want to keep tracking the total gw2eff account numbers too, it will be relevant.

Though too bad about the archival data not being available. I had hoped for more detailed info.
Guess might start tracking it myself, just need to think a bit about what i’d want tracked.
(probably i’ll just harvest the whole LI statistics page every week, or so, now that i’ve looked closer at it)
Will also need to calculate LI possible totals i guess (or i will just use the 1st spot position for that one)

Was reading replies and when I got to the 3rd page, without looking at poster names, I could have sworn I have seen the same statistics guru many times. I was right, Vinceman was present
As for the numbers, we are a guild with 80+ people online everyday.
Some do raid, but very rarely.
There are some organized raids. Like one every week or so. One squad.
So my impression is that the % of players that are actually raiding is very very small. I am talking about those that raid not those that kill one boss and call it a day. Or even worse, those hat pay for a boss kill.

And yes, raiding community is the problem. The fact that there are a few guilds that try to help new raiders…drop in the ocean.

Astralporing.1957:

Oh, come on, it has been over a year since HoT now. It’s not like the decision to buy HoT had to be made before launch.

And how did they find out about raid accessibility without actually playing the game? They don’t even know if they can handle the Raid or not. I’m not sure if Raid accessibility qualifies as a reason not to buy an expansion, I mean even if the Raids aren’t accessible they still have the rest of the expansion to play.

Oh, i agree about that part of your post – the definition of a “raider” is definitely different for everyone here, and without agreeing on it first we can’t really have a meaningful discussion about size of the raider community.

Indeed.

Though too bad about the archival data not being available. I had hoped for more detailed info.

Actually gw2efficiency has a much better statistic, it clearly gathers all the boss kill achievements and you can see in your achievement tab if you’ve killed a boss or not. If they expose that in graph form they could show us how many players actually killed a boss, including challenge mote versions. That would be a really valuable statistic.

That’s how WoW measures their raiding population, by counting how many players have boss kill achievements, it’s much more reliable and effective than counting a currency. It could help with accessibility too if that info was exposed somehow, showing you have an achievement (and especially the challenge mote achievement) should bypass any LI requirements easily. For example, a player that killed KC with the challenge mote, is likely more experienced at fighting KC than a player with 200+ LI that got them by farming VG or Escort.

Of course in those WoW statistics they also used subscriber numbers to have an accurate representation of the total playerbase, while those numbers were available. This meant that the percentage of Raiders was accurate enough. Now that subscriber numbers aren’t available they use different statistics to find out how many players are still playing to compare the raiders with the actual total.

The next problem after finding out the number of players who are raiding, is finding the number to compare them with, and that might prove much harder to come by, at least there is no statistic on gw2eff that you can use for that.

maddoctor.2738:

Astralporing.1957:

Oh, come on, it has been over a year since HoT now. It’s not like the decision to buy HoT had to be made before launch.

And how did they find out about raid accessibility without actually playing the game? They don’t even know if they can handle the Raid or not. I’m not sure if Raid accessibility qualifies as a reason not to buy an expansion, I mean even if the Raids aren’t accessible they still have the rest of the expansion to play.

Oh, i agree about that part of your post – the definition of a “raider” is definitely different for everyone here, and without agreeing on it first we can’t really have a meaningful discussion about size of the raider community.

Indeed.

Though too bad about the archival data not being available. I had hoped for more detailed info.

Actually gw2efficiency has a much better statistic, it clearly gathers all the boss kill achievements and you can see in your achievement tab if you’ve killed a boss or not. If they expose that in graph form they could show us how many players actually killed a boss, including challenge mote versions. That would be a really valuable statistic.

That’s how WoW measures their raiding population, by counting how many players have boss kill achievements, it’s much more reliable and effective than counting a currency. It could help with accessibility too if that info was exposed somehow, showing you have an achievement (and especially the challenge mote achievement) should bypass any LI requirements easily. For example, a player that killed KC with the challenge mote, is likely more experienced at fighting KC than a player with 200+ LI that got them by farming VG or Escort.

Of course in those WoW statistics they also used subscriber numbers to have an accurate representation of the total playerbase, while those numbers were available. This meant that the percentage of Raiders was accurate enough. Now that subscriber numbers aren’t available they use different statistics to find out how many players are still playing to compare the raiders with the actual total.

The next problem after finding out the number of players who are raiding, is finding the number to compare them with, and that might prove much harder to come by, at least there is no statistic on gw2eff that you can use for that.

I agree, that the actual gw2eff-statistic is limited, if we talk about the accuracy of our statistic statements. Achievment-boss kill percentage values + li percentage values would make the picture of the raidcommunity-size more accurate. Maybe we should ask efficiency, if they can provide this feature in the future development. Ofcourse it would be betterr to know the number of active players, but gw2 has no subscription- modell and we have to deal with that fact. I dont think, that anet would give us these numbers.

maddoctor.2738:

Though too bad about the archival data not being available. I had hoped for more detailed info.

Actually gw2efficiency has a much better statistic, it clearly gathers all the boss kill achievements and you can see in your achievement tab if you’ve killed a boss or not. If they expose that in graph form they could show us how many players actually killed a boss, including challenge mote versions. That would be a really valuable statistic.

Yes, that would be even better. That’s not what i meant however.

The legendary insights page alone is not bad, as it can sort-of track activity. The problem is, we don’t have its history. If we had that page’s snapshot done every week (weekly, because it would negate the fluctuations due to lockout reset times) since the site started tracking this currency, we could have done some really nice things with it.
Unfortunately, without in-site archive, and without anyone that actually thought to archive this info, we’ll be starting fresh (which means a lot of time before any sensible results arrive).
Boss kill achieves on top of that would of course help too – but again, without archive data…
(remember, we can’t really track size of the community through gw2eff. We can only try to track activity trends, and that requires a lot of data points to compare)

What would work better is an “official” version of gw2eff that uses all the user data (like how wow armory works?) but I really doubt we’d get something like this ever.

maddoctor.2738:

Found it! Meh it’s from January 3rd, 2017 so not really old but here it goes:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/dungeons/Raid-Normal-Hard-Mode/first#post6453090

January 3rd, 2017
Everyone: 29%
0-500h: 3%
500-1000h: 11%
1000-2000h: 25.5%
2000-4000h: 44%
4000h+: 61.5%

Friday 17th, 2017 (1 month later!)
Everyone: 30%
0-500h: 3%
500-1000h: 11%
1000-2000h: 25.5%
2000-4000h: 43.5%
4000h+: 61.5%

The everyone statistic is 1% up. The 2000-4000h statistic is 0.5% down, everything else looks the same.

I might have older ones that I didn’t post on the forums. Now I’ll bookmark this and probably do an archive every month to see how it grows.

Fun question – how many of that players are active raiders? Players usually stop playing due to various reasons, like being tired from particular game mode, or being disappointed with overall direction of such mode, or just being unable to keep up, or dropped because their friends dropped.
Right now we can see only how many people are tried raiding at some point.

Rednik.3809:

Right now we can see only how many people are tried raiding at some point.

Exactly why LI isn’t a very good indication of a “raider”.
However what we can see from the data is if the raiding community is growing. Unfortunately my old data is only a month old so it was highly unlikely to change much. But keeping those stored and checking every couple of months can show if there is a rise or decline in the number of players who raided at least once, that is, if there is new blood joining Raids. It won’t show us if old raiders stopped raiding in the same time frame but it’s as good as we can get given the tools at our disposal.

Deepcuts.9740:

Was reading replies and when I got to the 3rd page, without looking at poster names, I could have sworn I have seen the same statistics guru many times. I was right, Vinceman was present

“I’m here to help” – J4

Deepcuts.9740:

As for the numbers, we are a guild with 80+ people online everyday.
Some do raid, but very rarely.
There are some organized raids. Like one every week or so. One squad.
So my impression is that the % of players that are actually raiding is very very small. I am talking about those that raid not those that kill one boss and call it a day. Or even worse, those hat pay for a boss kill.

And yes, raiding community is the problem. The fact that there are a few guilds that try to help new raiders…drop in the ocean.

As for numbers, your numbers are unfounded rumors again, like in the fractal thread. You take the one guild you’re in and even mention “my impression” – so all of your words afterwards are lapsed.

Maybe you will learn some day, it’s possible without a doubt.

Vince dear, as i stated, it is just “my impression”
You should seek professional help.

Deepcuts.9740:

Vince dear, as i stated, it is just “my impression”
You should seek professional help.

Ty, but I don’t. Just helping stray sheeps.

I just love how this turned into a statistics debate.

Wasabi Kitty.8247:

I just love how this turned into a statistics debate.

feelsbadman ;-;