I have access to some more sophisticated stuff. But for the layman, current Excel has some very good data-from-screenshot functionality. Or there’s always AI.
1 Like
Since StatShark released the stats for May, here is the monthly comparison of “Games Played” in different game modes:
Number of battle sessions in game modes with combined arcade and realistic data:
Ground is by far the most played game mode currently. Naval is in very bad condition.
4 Likes
The significant growth in the ground mode, up in terms of players 50% over three months ago, to the point where ground RB is now over 50% of all games all by itself, is the real hidden story of War Thunder in 2025.
It’s remarkable to me how the air vehicle events don’t even make a dent. People just keep playing more and more ground. Honestly curious where all these new ground players are coming from.
2 Likes
Another Stellar analysis! Do you plan on making any more? Maybe so we might be able to see some evolution (Time-graphs of distribution, for example)?
I suppose I’ll wait until naval gets its new 8.7 BR and the new Naval Airplane BR’s then I guess.
Been noodling around with the same data in other threads. Since you’re interested in naval you might be interested in these:
1 Like
Probably last chart til the update. I think the below shows what’s been happening to Naval over the time of the last update.
Quick recap: in late January, the naval matchmaker was changed to force 16v16 matches, with bots filling in for human players in both modes. In March, the Hornet’s Sting update changed AB aiming significantly, and also greatly increased the amount of SL earned by killing bots.
Statshark allows us to compare the naval AB and RB modes before and after the March changes.
As we know (see charts in OP), the majority of high-tier naval games are either a match BR of 5.7 or a match BR of 7.0. Splitting up the player data into those BRs allows us an apples-to-apples comparison between mid-tier (4.7-5.7) and high tier (6.0-7.0) play.
Subtracting all player deaths from all naval kills gives us an upper bound for how many bot deaths there were (upper bound because lower-tier ships brought up into these tiers would also be counted). Adding these to the human spawns gives us a minimum number of ship spawns (not counting bots or lowtier surface combatants who survived). This allows us to give an upper bound to the number of bots in matches (max %nonhuman). Dividing Min Ship Spawns by days in the month and 32-ships per match, 3-spawns per match gives us an absolute minimum of the number of games that were played in this mode and BR range in this month (min games/d). The actual number is larger than this, but it allows comparison. I also added a column for the % of kills by ships at this BR that were air kills, K/D, Deaths/spawn (D/Spawn), botkills/death (botkills/D), human kills/death (“Human” K/D"), and human kills/death with planes removed (Hship K/D)
A couple obvious conclusions:
*RB is still more botted than AB, but not by much, at top tier it’s basically the same amount now
*Gaijin bots are more common at higher tiers
*Loss in games played due to the Hornets Sting changes has been in midtiers in both modes and AB high tier, only RB high tier has been unaffected by the drop off in players
*Drop in the number of air players is more pronounced in AB than in RB at both mid and high tiers. Because the number of bots hasn’t changed, as much, that means its human players playing less air vehicles than before.
*RB is superior to AB in terms of both ship survival (deaths per spawn) and kills per game at both mid and high tiers (and hence likely SL and RP earnings even before better multipliers are factored in), probably attributable to the greater number of bots
*AB at 5.7, an average ship life will net <1 bot kill (botkill/D), and about half as much as toptier AB. Bot kills/death for RB at both 5.7 and 7.0 are significantly higher. The amount of humans killing humans (“human” K/D) is sufficiently closer, especially if you factor out the Air kills (“Hship K/D”), basically a little above the parity you’d expect overall in the system (the remaining residual presumably being mostly the general fuzziness introduced by the smaller numbers of lower-tier matches within the brackets)
*Human K/D vs bots in AB actually got WORSE with the new simplified aiming system, even not counting for the decline of air play
4 Likes
Why don’t you show 1.0-4.3 data?
StatShark has added a new feature where you can see the sum of all values below the general statistics table:
And if you select a row, column or specific area inside the table, you will also see the sum of all selected elements below:
Spoiler
This is a very useful feature that will allow us to see specific values without having to extract the data from the table first. So now everyone can analyze this data much easier than before.
1 Like
I won’t get much to analysis, i’ll just say this.
GRB is the popular mode because it includes tanks , it includes planes and helis.
It’s the only mode that has markerless AIr RB for CAP and also CAS against players-opposition and SPAA.
Imagine i had a time that i played only this, because in WW2 it had smaller maps , so less time to combat , markerless RB because i love it and SPAA could make you worried…So it was fine.
But then with jets , i prefer jet gameplay and i turned to jet tiers air RB.
And then there are the helicopters …which like anything aviation is more accessible in RB than in SIM.
So if anything add those players as well.
So it’s not so of surprise it is the popular mode, because it’s the most open ended mode. You can do many things, just pick how you play.
Does this mean that it is a good mode?
No , not at all. I wonder if they make an only tank mode and a Markerless Air RB mode how many will stay…
Also, i’m betting if you make planes more viable in naval, it will double or tripple the playerbase…
1 Like
Planes in NAB get triple more RP then in AAB(just like in ARB), planes more than viable in Naval. Do Arcade pilots know that, i bet no.
What triple?
RP gain on planes in NAB
Ah… i don’t think it matters when you can’t even approach to do something most of the times.
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
Git gud mate
I don’t play AB
taps the sign
1 Like
In NRB planes are smemiplayable and get less rewards in RP than in NAB.
Maybe you post 1.0-4.3 data, why you hiding it? Doesn’t suit your theories and conclusions?
In order: Naval, Ground, Air.
Air SB is not represented as we have a very different reward structure (see: Community Bug Reporting System). We have the same score/action as ARB, but instead we’re rewarded only for activity% over 15 minute cycles. Furthermore, activity% caps out at 92% regardless of how much you exceed 1050 score, giving a fixed maximum potential reward that’s around 2000 RP without premium in a 136% RP economy plane for 1050, 1950, 2650 score alike (that’s ~2 kills + 1 crit, 4 crits + 3 crits, 6 kills + 1 crit, or whatever other rough combination of captures, kills and assists and crits), with a bonus ~+500 RP if you survive the full 15 minutes and land safely PROVIDED you got 2000 RP (ergo, you receive 80% of the 92% reward, and must land to receive the remaining 20% of 92%.)
You get 0.03 more RP per second in Naval AB flying planes compared to Air AB, and 0.07 more RP compared to GAB.
In contrast, a kill is worth 48 RP in Air AB and there’s guaranteed by definition to be more planes for you to shoot and kill, whereas in GAB one kill is worth 45 RP and in NAB only 40 RP.
Your claim is only very technically and marginally correct (there’s a 0.03 RP/second advantage ignoring however the activity% function is parametrized), at cost of -8 RP per kill compared to AAB.
Nowhere is it backed up regarding “you get triple the amount as in AAB” however -
Nor is “NRB” gives less RP for using planes at all substantiated.
Nota bene:
For air kills, reward is represented as 2 values unless you had scored a critical + crash, pilot kill or tail separation:
You receive 80% of your reward under “Severe Damage” heading and 20% for whatever they call “Kill confirmed” to be. If kill is confirmed by an ally you, don’t get the remaining 20% and instead they receive 40% of the reward for kill credit (this occurs if they shoot a plane with a deal engine, more than 50% of the wing cut off, all control surfaces disabled/removed or… black horizontal stabilizer.)
This might be the cause for confusion as a blackened horizontal stabilizer barely impacts flight performance with full-real controls in SB, much less with arcade boost and instructor in arcade so it’s very likely you scored 40% value kills in air arcade due to density of air combat and had assumed it was full reward. This is the only plausible hypothesis I can muster to justify your claim that NAB gives 3x the value of kills compared to AAB.
Example of kill credit being really weird in air battles. P-51C maintains near-full combat power (its right horizontal stabilizer IS shot off, but he's still turning and evading and diving.) has wing tip shot off, leading to me being rewarded an ASSIST when they die while a guy who damaged the horizontal stab long-since died being rewarded the kill. Preusmably, if I had had shot the pilot instead I'd have received 0.4x450=180 score for killing the P51C (4.0) rather than the expected 450 for a full kill (3.3 plane shooting 4.0 gets full score)
Another possible explanation would be that you are shooting downtier aircraft more often in AAB and are suffering the BR correction’s consequences (which is probable due to no SP cost to spawning and lineup respawns meaning people may keep respawning to keep fighting in planes whose BR is a significant difference from yours):
Of course, if you collate sufficient data to provide tables on par of the linked article with proper methodology, I am willing to concede that the cited work is outdated in its reward quantities and requires updating. However, as of presently I trust its veracity given my own experiences with the score I earn for my actions lining up as expected.
Example of perfect line-up:
Fw190A4 (4.0) kills F6F-5 (3.7) through direct pilot snipe, resulting in no critical hit score being awarded. This is evidenced by the battle log reading "Shot down", rather than "Severely damaged" or "Critically damaged" in additional to the kill being credited while the visual model is still intact, rather than requiring a crash or bailout beforehand.
BR step difference is 0.3, therefore 450 x 0.986 = 443.7.
In game, I was awarded 444 score which is 443.7 rounded up, thus confirming that the formulae and scoring system remain applicable within ASB at least.