Average Player Population by Class and Level - data fun!

[Gamkek]

Originally Posted by falkun [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The pop numbers from project1999.org are the same numbers provided by the server list. I would bet these numbers are "people connected to the server", which would include people sitting at character select. These accounts (people) are logged into the server, but do not have a character in the game world (therefore would not show up on a /who count). 26 seems very reasonable in that case.

Yeah, I'm on board with this accounting for the discrepancy. People tend to take sudden and/or long afks from EQ, or just log off their character for a bit to stay safe but intend to come back, so it makes sense there would be quite a few people just sitting at the log in screen.

I'm quite surprised that there are so many freaking druids. Everything I've read has always seemed to indicate clerics + shamans > druids at high levels. But I guess there are a lot of solo players/farmers who are in it for the travel spells, heals and kiting. Now that I think about it, sounds more or less like what Live was like back in 2000. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[bigforest]

Originally Posted by falkun [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I would bet these numbers are "people connected to the server", which would include people sitting at character select.

This is the most reasonable explanation I've heard or considered. Thanks!

All new sets of data coming next week...

[Boombha]

I think what you did is amazing, so /anon numbers are right or not, isn't much of the point, it gives a nice representation of the server.

For those of us geeky types who like numbers and graphs, it's pretty cool!

[MissingNo]

What's up with all the druids considering what people say about them not really desirable for groups 50+? Is it just people's farmers? If that's the case, why is it so much higher than necros or shaman or enchanters?

[Raavak]

Originally Posted by MissingNo [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

What's up with all the druids...

This surprised me. I wonder where they are all hiding.

[WhatIsAJuggalo]

forgot about druid/cleric :S

thanks for the advice... looking at cleric, i think ill roll that and the other dude will go with SK.

[WhatIsAJuggalo]

i have a question regarding making an ez mode levelling group that will still have application in higher level content. me and three others are getting back into eq. two of them are playing monk and shaman for sure, and obviously those two alone will be able to breeze through most content.

the other is leaning towards shadowknight (he mained beastlord on live but obviously none here) but looking at these statistics it seems like shadowknight, paladin, and ranger are classes that will be shunned in classic end game content (if we even intend on doing raiding, we'll see).

getting around to the question, not that we'll have many problems, but what would be the ideal classes to fill out after the monk and shaman. will we really need a full tank, and if we do, will pallies or sks even be considered for end game?

also, if he ends up sticking with tank, i cant decide on the remaining utility/DPS class. each of the remaining DPS/casters have benefits (except ranger lawl). wizard would get ports, mage would have a reliable pet + nuke combo, enchanter is just plain useful and would have decent buffs for the other three, rogue along with the monk would end lives quickly. necro probably wouldnt contribute that much. they all sound appealing [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Ele]

Originally Posted by WhatIsAJuggalo [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

i have a question regarding making an ez mode levelling group that will still have application in higher level content. me and three others are getting back into eq. two of them are playing monk and shaman for sure, and obviously those two alone will be able to breeze through most content.

the other is leaning towards shadowknight (he mained beastlord on live but obviously none here) but looking at these statistics it seems like shadowknight, paladin, and ranger are classes that will be shunned in classic end game content (if we even intend on doing raiding, we'll see).

getting around to the question, not that we'll have many problems, but what would be the ideal classes to fill out after the monk and shaman. will we really need a full tank, and if we do, will pallies or sks even be considered for end game?

also, if he ends up sticking with tank, i cant decide on the remaining utility/DPS class. each of the remaining DPS/casters have benefits (except ranger lawl). wizard would get ports, mage would have a reliable pet + nuke combo, enchanter is just plain useful and would have decent buffs for the other three, rogue along with the monk would end lives quickly. necro probably wouldnt contribute that much. they all sound appealing [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I would fill out the rest of that foursome with an SK and Cleric.

[Grozmok]

No clerics on that list?

/sadpanda

[webrunner5]

There is Nothing wrong with a SK or a Pally even in raids. It is mostly the Hybred penalty that kills them off. The 40% or more penalty slows down group XP, which makes it harder to get a group, and they get tired of seeing their friends they started with being level 50 while they are level 30. That is the problem.