In order to combat SPAM on the forums, all users are required to have a minimum of 2 posts before they can submit links in any post or thread.
Discussion in 'UHall' started by Facehugga, Apr 20, 2009.
As title, i'm wondering where is the smallest population on an EA shard?
Right this second (noon GMT)
The least populated is Oceana
The least populated in Asia is Mugen
The least populated in US is Siege
The least populated in Europe is Drachenfels
The least populated production shard in the US is Origin
Data accumulated by using "sort by population" on the shard selection screen in KR.
This will likely change depending on the time of day.
Ok siege, but which is the 2nd one after siege in US ?
According to the list above, that would be Origin.
I was just wondering if US servers have the same problem as i.e. DF
I got the impression that the Korean (?) shards are quite empty when I visited there last year. Only housing anyone owned was a castle, keep or 18x18
Origin is likely the least populated US shard. We joke about the 20 of us who still play there.
I've been watching for a while and to me, for american shards, it seems a toss-up between Origin and Lake Austin.
He he, why is there more open house spots on Lake Austin than on Origin?
Just a Nit with the uo team about House retention / decay.
You are correct.
Try this. Go to Airang. Create a char. Walk outside luna walls. Note the compete lack of housing. You can place an 18x18 anywhere you want.
There are about 50 people that play that shard and most of it is champ spawns.
Good question. Is there a way to get the number of people actually logged in to a server?
Origin is pretty unpopulated...
I know 3 keep spots near my old house. At the very minute I just recalled there to check on the spot yep, still empty.
What was really funny tho... Origin fel keep at GREAT LOCATION goes for around 500k...
There are a ... number of Keep slots open on Lake Austin and I have seen Castle Slots. Me I prefer Isolated (no spawn, no traffic) 3 story 18x18 house myself so .....
What I don't get is there must bee 100 houses per ... player on Lake Austin, well that or there must be a lot of Lake Austin Players that play invis'd.
3 less a rarely play there
If activity at Luna bank equates to shard population, I'd have to say Lake Austin's population is probably the smallest. Origin is also pretty quiet, but from what I've seen, LA has consistently been the quietest in Luna the last couple of months.
Sometimes I also measure a shard's population by the amt. of missing homes on it where once many homes of all sizes were, now showing empty and somewhat depressing.
Still housing is not a good measure either, cuz people leave the old world lands due to invasions lack of guards in towns not turned back on or whatever and seem to all move or glut onto Luna Umbra and Zento as more crowded now than old world lands even tram side.
I was going all over Chesapeake yesterday and today and was really stunned to see how many homes are GONE...empty plots all over the place except close in by Luna, Umbra and Zento were all pretty full up, but I am talking trammel here where once every spot of lands were full of homes, now empty big plots huge plots small too medium plots all empty on Chesapeake kinda depressing. I think it still has a large population but dang...once there was NO spots open to some only now just looks way too many empty plots out there esp for Trammel. *sigh*
So not sure how to *measure* a shard's population any longer seem to see folks, yet but seeing less and less of em, less homes standing and many of those that are standing seem vacant ... or unused empty even esp if public some are just big empty homes or *spare* homes and plot after plot just empty of any homes placed like before. Weird, kinda depressing too.
I BET on EM Event day these unpopulated shards are more than buZZing..LOL
Can I have a list of which is the most populated shard to the least populated shard please?
Anyone got any idea?
Most populated shards right this minute:
USA west coast: Baja
Again using KR log in screen, again bearing in mind that the data is from noon GMT.
Just done a "search" and it would appear that the smalles populated shards are Balhae and Arirang, with less that 150guilds and very few members in the top 10
From November 2007 to May 2008, I kept track of the points at the Moonglow zoo in Trammel on each shard. As of May 3, 2008, the last week I checked the totals, this is how the shards stacked up from smallest total to largest:
2 Lake Austin
6 Napa Valley
17 Siege Perilous
23 Lake Superior
24 Great Lakes
When I started tracking the numbers on November 10, 2007, ranking the zoo totals by shard from smallest to largest put them in this order:
1 Siege Perilous
6 Napa Valley
8 Lake Austin
13 Great Lakes
14 Lake Superior
I'm not sure how useful these numbers are to you. During the time I was tracking and posting the weekly rankings, some shards with small populations got very involved with zoo donations as a matter of pride. Some of the shards with much larger populations were a lot more laid back about all of it!
You aren't lucky enough to have Tyrant on your shard.
There is nothing wrong with smaller shards.
The Zoo donation showed nicely that smaller shards can accomplish big things.Our smaller community just pulls together when needed.
We had a mini-event with the Em's last sunday. I even was suprised we had 40-45 people showing up for it. Even i wonder sometimes where they all came from.
Don't compare shard activity with how many people that are in Luna bank. We not all bankhuggers. You won't find me often there , i have lots of other things to do.