Trying to determine the number of global players

I track my stats in the challenge event, mostly to know whether my current scores are good enough or whether I should re-do a certain round. But it also gives an idea of whether the fanbase is growing or shrinking. My scores in the most recent 15-round 3* tourneys have been pretty much the same, but the rankings are fairly different:


There are multiple possible explanations for these numbers…

I’m afraid there’s too many possible explanations to give you any meaningful idea about the number of players globally. Total or trends. :slight_smile:


Had a similar convo in the Mythic Titan thread


Yep, Ruskin, Mythic Titans rankings are the best way to determine the size of the player base, precisely by looking at the cutoff between 1% and 5%. I’ll be interested to see if that number changes over time.

Out of curiosity, why do you feel Mythic Titans are a better indicator than weekly raid tournaments?

Either way you need a fair number of data points, but you’ll get those faster with raid tournaments, even if you discard 5* ones.


I have an alt which I deliberately used its first mythic titan flag to score zero (and will not use any more flags). Here is the current ranking:

I just don’t know if there are players around the world who also used one single mythic titan flag to score a zero. If there are more of us, then there are as many players ranked at 899,614th.

If the raid tourney is to be gauged, it is best that an account is to join the tourney to set the defense to ensure getting the lowest defense grade and to score 0 on the first raid tourney flag. They should also be ranked. Zero score for offense and the lowest defense rating should place such player or players to the bottomest of the rankings.


For what it’s worth, my alt doesn’t enter raid tournaments and I rarely remember to hit the mythic titan there (autoplay). Just don’t have the time or energy to do much more than autoplay normal titan hits and any easily achievable POV goals on that account :woman_shrugging:


Here is something a little more accurate with an explainer/disclaimer.

I used my prime account, you can see I am equal last on 2 counts at 975,781; considering the number of duplicate accounts I bet they can’t claim 400,000 unique users.

:laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:


Ultra’s and sft1965’s zero attack has a huge ranking gap
Itll be pretty hard to make that as a basis of e&p population.
Do they include inactive accounts? Etc…
Hey @Ultra i wanna recruit your alt :joy:

Curious isn’t it? I’d guess that they just make those numbers up after a certain point.

EDIT: for the sake of replication I used one of my 1/1 Squire Rabbits for attack, used 3 yellow tiles and the Titan killed me next turn.

1 Like

Need to make an account named Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz

As I am pretty sure that for equal points the alphabetic order comes into play.


Couldn’t it just be the 3 hour gap between your hits that explain the ranking difference?

More players have had time to make a hit.


Also, don’t you need to be in an alliance to hit mythic titans? Every month I get a message saying « mythic titan coming, join an alliance nowf, although I’m in one.
Solo players wouldn’t be included in the count, then.

The fact that SG and Zynga are not showing off the numbers and boasting about them online says a lot :slight_smile:

1 Like

Or because the are all tied at the same rank?

e.g. If 1st, 2nd and 3rd place are tied, they are all given 1st place and the next is 4th.

Now think if 76,000 players are tied with Ultra (zero points and no hits) at ranking #899614.
The next lowest rank (zero with one hit) will be Ultra’s minus 76,000 = sft1965 at ranking #975781.

Actually, it is not. My ss above was taken approx 2 hours before it was uploaded. Approx 2 hours after, sft uploaded his.

Here is the current ranking of mine:

So, as time goes by, our rankings go down more. This means that there are players who have yt to attack against the mythic titan. Our rankings will be established and finalized on the minute the mythic titan event concludes.


Yup, there are lots of players, one being me, who have yet to hit the MT - and probably never will.
Those who don’t aren’t included in the leaderboard so…

MTs are not a reliable indicator of active accounts.
Tournaments need you to join so they aren’t a reliable indicator of active accounts either.

OTOH active accounts aren’t a reliable indicator of actual unique players :woman_shrugging:t3:


Hi Zathrus!

I was trying to say that mythic titans are a better gauge than the monthly tourneys, not that they are better than the weekly tourneys. That said, I know there are people in my fairly strong alliance who have given up on the weekly tourneys but still do the MT, probably because of effort/reward ratios. Just a guess; could be wrong.

1 Like

First off - a thank-you to everyone who chimed in here. This thread went better than I could have hoped.

As for Yhc’s point: until SG tells us how many active accounts there are - and defines what an “active account” is - those who are interested in the size of the player base have to look for clues and hints. I think participation in the MT event is better metric than most others, because:

a - there are three different skill levels, so that even the newest beginner can participate;
b - the effort/reward trade-off is very favorable when compared with tourneys or Ninja Tower;
c - although there are certainly many people who don’t like MT, that’s true for any event; the best metric is looking at the event that the fewest people dislike.

There’s no absolute way for players to measure active accounts, no. But that’s not the point. We CAN measure trends (more players or less over time), and it’s reasonable to extrapolate ACTIVITY based on that.

We’re not measuring for financial reasons or market research. We don’t need absolutely accurate information. But if it’s down from ~2M 2 years ago to ~1.5M now for accounts actually playing in weekly tournaments, that’s a pretty good indication of loss of interest.

Whether it’s unique players or not is also irrelevant to the question.


Cookie Settings