1) This only counts a player once even if they are on two 2200+ teams.
2) The player must have a winning record on the team to prevent team selling members from counting.
3) Players are counted from all across the world.
Legend:
First Number - Total number of players in that class.
Second Number - Percentage of total for the bracket/cutoff.
I'll leave you to make your own interpretations of the numbers.
AJ Numbers: Players on 2200+ Teams
Class 2v2 3v3 5v5 Druid 729 (24.5%) 502 (15.9%) 285 (7.5%) Hunter 177 (6.0%) 189 (6.0%) 276 (7.2%) Mage 109 (3.7%) 317 (10.0%) 435 (11.4%) Paladin 112 (3.8%) 170 (5.4%) 516 (13.5%) Priest: 298 (10.0%) 433 (13.7%) 604 (15.8%) Rogue: 456 (15.4%) 604 (19.1%) 315 (8.2%) Shaman: 100 (3.4%) 125 (4.0%) 396 (10.4%) Warlock: 400 (13.5%) 312 (9.9%) 462 (12.1%) Warrior: 589 (19.8%) 506 (16.0%) 535 (14.0%)AJ Numbers: Players on 1850+ Teams
Class 2v2 3v3 5v5 Druid 7322 (17.0%) 4841 (12.3%) 2209 (7.0%) Hunter 2674 (6.2%) 2522 (6.4%) 2237 (7.1%) Mage 2424 (5.6%) 3997 (10.1%) 3434 (10.9%) Paladin 2669 (6.2%) 3439 (8.7%) 4595 (14.6%) Priest 5173 (12.0%) 5375 (13.6%) 4644 (14.7%) Rogue 6903 (16.1%) 6733 (17.0%) 2551 (8.1%) Shaman 2102 (4.9%) 2624 (6.6%) 3483 (11.1%) Warlock 5934 (13.8%) 3998 (10.1%) 3381 (10.7%) Warrior 7772 (18.1%) 5963 (15.1%) 4966 (15.8%)Kalgan's Percentages: 2200+ where 100% is expected (Believed to be normalized based on class population)
http://forums.worldo...geNo=4&sid=1#74
Class 2v2 3v3 5v5 Druid 276.0% 184.0% 80.5% Hunter 43.0% 50.2% 43.0% Mage 8.7% 96.0% 96.0% Paladin 19.7% 29.5% 147.4% Priest 113.3% 164.8% 185.4% Shaman 37.8% 50.4% 138.6% Rogue 144.2% 175.1% 61.8% Warlock 149.2% 93.2% 111.9% Warrior 130.4% 90.7% 79.3%Kalgan's Percentages: 1850+ where 100% is expected (Believed to be normalized based on class population)
http://forums.worldo...1&pageNo=13#254
Class 2v2 3v3 5v5 Druid 184.0% 138.0% 92.0% Hunter 50.2% 50.2% 50.2% Mage 61.1% 87.3% 87.3% Paladin 68.8% 88.4% 137.6% Priest 133.9% 133.9% 154.5% Shaman 75.6% 88.2% 138.6% Rogue 154.5% 154.5% 82.4% Warlock 121.2% 102.5% 102.5% Warrior 90.7% 85.0% 85.0%

Comments
#1 Vexo
Posted 12 March 2008 - 10:11 PM
#2 Tyveris
Posted 12 March 2008 - 10:16 PM
#3 Kaligo
Posted 12 March 2008 - 10:18 PM
#4 Tyveris
Posted 12 March 2008 - 10:23 PM
Kaligo said:
#5 Escabar
Posted 12 March 2008 - 11:54 PM
#6 blackwater
Posted 12 March 2008 - 11:59 PM
http://www.realmhist...-breakdown.html
#7 Tyveris
Posted 13 March 2008 - 12:03 AM
blackwater said:
http://www.realmhist...-breakdown.html
#8 Escabar
Posted 13 March 2008 - 12:12 AM
they show that
warriors are #1 or 2 in all brackets
Druids are #1/2 in 2v2 and 3v3 and quite high in 5v5
rogues sit up damn high around 3-4 depending on bracket
then come in slight diffs to bracket. in 2s/3s its locks/mages next, where as in 5s its priest/pallies next then shamans then lock then mage
#9 Tyveris
Posted 13 March 2008 - 01:07 AM
#10 Anarexea
Posted 13 March 2008 - 02:20 AM
was that an intentional difference between these stats and kalgans? or is tyveris saying that it doesnt make sense to normalize by class population?
just making sure...
#11 Tyveris
Posted 13 March 2008 - 02:23 AM
A few people asked for some numbers, so I figured I could post them. It looks like there is a discrepancy in balance of some classes compared to the figures he posted.
#12 Agonizer
Posted 13 March 2008 - 02:25 AM
Kalgan specifically stated that his expected percentage was based off class population, meaning you'd have to divide the numbers in the 2nd column by ~16% if it was warriors, 16% for rogues, 7% for druids, etc...
You're dividing all of them by 11.1%
Not saying which way the numbers should be interpreted, just pointing out the inconsistency.
#13 Tyveris
Posted 13 March 2008 - 02:37 AM
There have been a few posts comparing them to wow census data and its still not even close. He magically tweaked the numbers somehow which is why I posted the raw data so people can compare them. the Expected %s were added by request via PM just so they could see how similarly they lined up to Kalgans.
#14 Augnon
Posted 13 March 2008 - 02:41 AM
Drmoo said:
Keiret said:
Axolotl said:
#15 Agonizer
Posted 13 March 2008 - 02:56 AM
Tyveris said:
There have been a few posts comparing them to wow census data and its still not even close. He magically tweaked the numbers somehow which is why I posted the raw data so people can compare them. the Expected %s were added by request via PM just so they could see how similarly they lined up to Kalgans.
If you're trying to replicate Kalgan's numbers, you should realize that Kalgan said "normalized for class popularity." Your numbers are normalized for equal popularity. That is a big difference.
Your explanation for Kalgan's numbers: "Kalgan's Percentages: 2200+ where 100% is expected (normalized based on total population)" is quite wrong.
#16 Tyveris
Posted 13 March 2008 - 03:05 AM
Agonizer said:
If you're trying to replicate Kalgan's numbers, you should realize that Kalgan said "normalized for class popularity." Your numbers are normalized for equal popularity. That is a big difference.
Your explanation for Kalgan's numbers: "Kalgan's Percentages: 2200+ where 100% is expected (normalized based on total population)" is quite wrong.
Why is that quite wrong? I mean total class population, I'll rephrase it as that sounds more clear.
#17 Jellygoose
Posted 13 March 2008 - 03:16 AM
#18 Tyveris
Posted 13 March 2008 - 03:20 AM
Daseman said:
I could just as easily remove those percentages if that somehow makes it more useful. /shrug
#19 blackfoot
Posted 13 March 2008 - 03:23 AM
Tyveris said:
Why is that quite wrong? I mean total class population, I'll rephrase it as that sounds more clear.
rather than divide each by 11.11%, since the populations are not equal I would be more interested if you divide it by the actual % of players of that class, because it would be more relevent.
For example, imagine there are 100 players, lets say 20 are warriors and 80 are druids
lets say 1/2 of each of those classes don't even arena, while the rest do and have 1700+ rating.
If there are only 10 warriors doing arena and 5 of them get to 2200+ that would mean warriors had a great chance to be high level. Furthermore if you had 40 druids and 10 of them got to 2200, that would mean druids don't have as good as a chance to hit 2200+ as a warrior, since only 1/4 druids made it that far, while 1/2 the warriors did.
If you divided both the 5 warriors and 10 druids by the 11.11% then you would be thinking, oh man druids are way overrepresented and thus OP, which would be false.
Since so many players play warriors, you must account for this.
#20 Tyveris
Posted 13 March 2008 - 03:31 AM
As for normalizing the top end based on the total population, does that even make sense? There were quite a few good arguments in the other thread of why that should not be done. People reroll classes in order to be competitive.
Anyways, its up to you to infer what you want from either set of stats, I just figure the more information people have, the better it is.