![]() I have never judged a game's health by it's peak.Ĭome in at 3-4am and see how long it takes to get a match. The point is that peak times don't show the full picture of the game's health. This is just illustrative, and if numbers were produced for the 24-hour it may show no decrease at all. So even though only 500 players less were on at peak, which is inconsequential, over the whole 24-hour period it would be nearly -9000 players (perhaps more significant). Or not.īy which I mean if peaks was say 15,000 NA and the bookends around peak were say 9k, and then the bookends around them were 7k and the dead zone was say 5k and that was our average (5/7/9/15/9/7/5*) *this 5 doesn't count, it's the same as the first 5 being the dead zone, it's just there to illustrate) then we would have a daily of some 52,000 playersĪnd then the numbers now were (3/6/7/14.5/7/6) then we would have a daily of 43,500 players. ![]() Peaks may remain fairly stable, or if high might lose numbers that don't make a drastic difference, while times outside of peak might see a different kind of bleed that adds up. Peak is not a good number, but if you have some comparable 24-hour totals then they might be interesting.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |