while dps meters are good to register dps and allow players to improve as dps but they create toxicity in raids/guilds and small groups forcing players to adopt a optimal build regardless of whether they want to or not.
If you are joining a group or a raid, you have an obligation to fulfill your role to the best of your abilities.
If you know you are playing a build that is not the best for the role in the group or raid you have agreed to fill, why would you agree to fill that role?
Sure, you may not be the best player in the world, you may not have the best gear in the world. These are things you cant immediately do anything about.
Running a sub-par build, however, that is something you can change. If you do not change it, it is simply because tou are unwilling.
Why should me and my group or raid have to suffer because you refuse to change to a build that is better suited to the role you agreed to fill?
That said, a game will have a meta with or without combat trackers. There absolutely will be a list of acceptable builds that you must conform to in order to be taken along on most pick up content.
you just stated yourself that you would effectively create the problem that wow and several mmorpgs have because of said trackers. If Intrepid are trying to change the genre then the worse thing to do is to have a tracker that forces optimum builds and kill its own entire line of creativity so early on.
No, I stated that it will exist regardless of trackers existing or not.
That statement has been a fairly consistent theme throughout this whole thread.
Even without a tracker, the game will have a meta - or a list of builds that players generally deem acceptable to use. I can cite at least one example of this happening in another game if you need me to.
What you haven't explained though, is why someone that is wanting to get through content quickly should accept taking along someone that is not I treated in being efficient. When you break it down, this is essentially what you are saying - that those wanting to run content efficiently are less important than those that dont care, and thus all burden should be placed on the shoulders of those that want efficiency.
What I would like to know is - why do you believe the entire burden here should be carried by those wanting efficiency? Why is none of that burden borne by the player that does not care? I mean, they are the one agreeing to join the group to fill the specific role, why should there be anythi g less than the expectation that this player will do their utmost at that role.
I mean, you are right in that there is an issue when those wanting to do content quickly converge with those not concerned with speed at all. This really is an issue.
The thing is, combat trackers aren't needed for this issue to manifest. Removing combat trackers wont remove this issue, as some players will still want to do content as fast as they can, and some players will still not care.
The part I dont understand though - again - is why you are placing the blame for this issue on those wanting to be efficient, rather than on those not caring.
To me, at the absolute best, it is an issue where each party is equally to blame.
0
Options
akabearMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
while dps meters are good to register dps and allow players to improve as dps but they create toxicity in raids/guilds and small groups forcing players to adopt a optimal build regardless of whether they want to or not.
What I would like to know is - why do you believe the entire burden here should be carried by those wanting efficiency? Why is none of that burden borne by the player that does not care? I mean, they are the one agreeing to join the group to fill the specific role, why should there be anythi g less than the expectation that this player will do their utmost at that role.
Apart from PUGs how is this an occurrence with frequency worth worrying about?
The best way to figure if something is good or not for a game is how it can be abused. If the abuse is high and destructive, its not meant to be in the game. If the abuse is low and rare, it can be added into the game.
I have two questions for you, if you have the time.
The first is - in WoW, in LFG/LFR content, do you think people would have been so quick to remove others from the group or raid if there wasn't a system to automatically replace them?
The second question is - do you think the issues would have persisted if the game had have implemented a combat tracker directly in to the client, but restricted it's use to only people within your own guild?
The answer to the first question is I don't think people would be so quick to remove others if the system didn't replace them in the next 3 minutes. As pugging through Normal raiding using the premade group finder is more forgiving and usually groups disband when people start leaving, as kicking isn't as common. In Classic WoW as well as Vanilla WoW people tended to put up with it more often because you would have to fly to a capital city and yell in trade chat you need someone, then travel all the way back to the dungeon. In terms of time investment it was just better to teach the crappy player than kick them for a better replacement.
for the second question as much as i hate admitting it the biggest issue is a human issue. Combat tracker or not gamers tend not to see other gamers (strangers at least) as human beings with emotion behind the screen. They either see them as tools to achieve their goals or inconveniences that hinder their progress. The reason this is so common in WoW is that the game is designed in a way where you don't really have to interact with people. Need guild perks? join a large guild that spams recruiting and never say anything in the guild. Or make your own guild for just you. Need to do end game content just sign up through the group finder or premade group finder and do the mechanics right and you'll never have to say anything. I feel like though combat tracker would be more positive for guilds or groups of close people because instead of relying on damage or healing numbers it could rely on if you're avoiding mechanics or not. Though I answer that not fully being aware of what a combat tracker is i'm just guessing it could be like something DBM but in a way it shows everyone what you're doing.
A combat tracker is kind of like DBM, but with a few less features. DBM treads slightly in to the territory of combat assistant.
That said, I agree with everything here.
Games like WoW treat players as if they are disposable, and so it should come as no surprise that players of such games treat each other as disposable.
By contrast, players in games where you are more reliant on your community tend to have players that treat each other significantly better.
I mean, if you are forming a group up to run some content, you aren't likely to invite the guy that was a dick in your last group. If groups are limited to server only, that player is going to run out of people to group with very quickly - whereas in WoW, there is a limitless supply of groups for that player to join.
To me, this says that a guild only combat tracker would result in all the positive aspects of trackers, and none of the negative aspects.
However, the only way for a guild only tracker to exist is if the game developer builds it in to the game client.
This is what my argument during this entire thread is. Would that be an position you agree with?
Literally he just wants them to have trackers so then the next step is it is normalized for everyone to have it besides just being in guild. That way if someone is using one not in game there can't be anything against them TOS wise as they can just argue the game already supports trackers.
The best way to figure if something is good or not for a game is how it can be abused. If the abuse is high and destructive, its not meant to be in the game. If the abuse is low and rare, it can be added into the game.
I have two questions for you, if you have the time.
The first is - in WoW, in LFG/LFR content, do you think people would have been so quick to remove others from the group or raid if there wasn't a system to automatically replace them?
The second question is - do you think the issues would have persisted if the game had have implemented a combat tracker directly in to the client, but restricted it's use to only people within your own guild?
The answer to the first question is I don't think people would be so quick to remove others if the system didn't replace them in the next 3 minutes. As pugging through Normal raiding using the premade group finder is more forgiving and usually groups disband when people start leaving, as kicking isn't as common. In Classic WoW as well as Vanilla WoW people tended to put up with it more often because you would have to fly to a capital city and yell in trade chat you need someone, then travel all the way back to the dungeon. In terms of time investment it was just better to teach the crappy player than kick them for a better replacement.
for the second question as much as i hate admitting it the biggest issue is a human issue. Combat tracker or not gamers tend not to see other gamers (strangers at least) as human beings with emotion behind the screen. They either see them as tools to achieve their goals or inconveniences that hinder their progress. The reason this is so common in WoW is that the game is designed in a way where you don't really have to interact with people. Need guild perks? join a large guild that spams recruiting and never say anything in the guild. Or make your own guild for just you. Need to do end game content just sign up through the group finder or premade group finder and do the mechanics right and you'll never have to say anything. I feel like though combat tracker would be more positive for guilds or groups of close people because instead of relying on damage or healing numbers it could rely on if you're avoiding mechanics or not. Though I answer that not fully being aware of what a combat tracker is i'm just guessing it could be like something DBM but in a way it shows everyone what you're doing.
A combat tracker is kind of like DBM, but with a few less features. DBM treads slightly in to the territory of combat assistant.
That said, I agree with everything here.
Games like WoW treat players as if they are disposable, and so it should come as no surprise that players of such games treat each other as disposable.
By contrast, players in games where you are more reliant on your community tend to have players that treat each other significantly better.
I mean, if you are forming a group up to run some content, you aren't likely to invite the guy that was a dick in your last group. If groups are limited to server only, that player is going to run out of people to group with very quickly - whereas in WoW, there is a limitless supply of groups for that player to join.
To me, this says that a guild only combat tracker would result in all the positive aspects of trackers, and none of the negative aspects.
However, the only way for a guild only tracker to exist is if the game developer builds it in to the game client.
This is what my argument during this entire thread is. Would that be an position you agree with?
DBM was nice but it also felt like it played the game for you in a specific way. I believe Final Fantasy 14 did it a bit better with markets and indications of where not to be in. Having in game help that gives you signals of "you need to do this mechanic" instead of just "Watch youtube videos before joining" would be better for the games health. Imagine yourself going into new content to experience, you're excited to experience it for the first time, but you can't join any group because you don't know the mechanics to the content. No one wants to teach and no one wants anyone who would waste minutes of their time. So the only solution is for the new person to ruin his experience by watching the entire fight and learning from it, then mimicing every action. This isn't really playing a video game this is just simon says. So the new experience is ruined cause you watched the video and there is no overcoming challenge because you spoiled everything by watching the video first. The video solution should only really be used if said new player is constantly failing or struggling at mechanics and explanations through chat isn't getting through to them.
Literally he just wants them to have trackers so then the next step is it is normalized for everyone to have it besides just being in guild. That way if someone is using one not in game there can't be anything against them TOS wise as they can just argue the game already supports trackers.
Wait. I thought I didn't care about the ToS.
If I didnt care about the ToS as you have said, I wouldn't be posting to try and change it. If I am posting to try and change it, I must care about what it says.
I mean, it cant be both.
I want the game to have built in trackers so that literally every person that wants to use them is able to use them.
I am suggesting they be guild basednsonthat those not wanting to deal with them will have mo inherent need to do so.
Literally he just wants them to have trackers so then the next step is it is normalized for everyone to have it besides just being in guild. That way if someone is using one not in game there can't be anything against them TOS wise as they can just argue the game already supports trackers.
Wait. I thought I didn't care about the ToS.
If I didnt care about the ToS as you have said, I wouldn't be posting to try and change it. If I am posting to try and change it, I must care about what it says.
I mean, it cant be both.
I want the game to have built in trackers so that literally every person that wants to use them is able to use them.
I am suggesting they be guild basednsonthat those not wanting to deal with them will have mo inherent need to do so.
That is literally it.
Ill repeat myself from before you will do it anyway and don't care about TOS. But if you can get it in then TOS can't stop you from doing anything at all and it will be easier to use more third party tools.
The best way to figure if something is good or not for a game is how it can be abused. If the abuse is high and destructive, its not meant to be in the game. If the abuse is low and rare, it can be added into the game.
I have two questions for you, if you have the time.
The first is - in WoW, in LFG/LFR content, do you think people would have been so quick to remove others from the group or raid if there wasn't a system to automatically replace them?
The second question is - do you think the issues would have persisted if the game had have implemented a combat tracker directly in to the client, but restricted it's use to only people within your own guild?
The answer to the first question is I don't think people would be so quick to remove others if the system didn't replace them in the next 3 minutes. As pugging through Normal raiding using the premade group finder is more forgiving and usually groups disband when people start leaving, as kicking isn't as common. In Classic WoW as well as Vanilla WoW people tended to put up with it more often because you would have to fly to a capital city and yell in trade chat you need someone, then travel all the way back to the dungeon. In terms of time investment it was just better to teach the crappy player than kick them for a better replacement.
for the second question as much as i hate admitting it the biggest issue is a human issue. Combat tracker or not gamers tend not to see other gamers (strangers at least) as human beings with emotion behind the screen. They either see them as tools to achieve their goals or inconveniences that hinder their progress. The reason this is so common in WoW is that the game is designed in a way where you don't really have to interact with people. Need guild perks? join a large guild that spams recruiting and never say anything in the guild. Or make your own guild for just you. Need to do end game content just sign up through the group finder or premade group finder and do the mechanics right and you'll never have to say anything. I feel like though combat tracker would be more positive for guilds or groups of close people because instead of relying on damage or healing numbers it could rely on if you're avoiding mechanics or not. Though I answer that not fully being aware of what a combat tracker is i'm just guessing it could be like something DBM but in a way it shows everyone what you're doing.
A combat tracker is kind of like DBM, but with a few less features. DBM treads slightly in to the territory of combat assistant.
That said, I agree with everything here.
Games like WoW treat players as if they are disposable, and so it should come as no surprise that players of such games treat each other as disposable.
By contrast, players in games where you are more reliant on your community tend to have players that treat each other significantly better.
I mean, if you are forming a group up to run some content, you aren't likely to invite the guy that was a dick in your last group. If groups are limited to server only, that player is going to run out of people to group with very quickly - whereas in WoW, there is a limitless supply of groups for that player to join.
To me, this says that a guild only combat tracker would result in all the positive aspects of trackers, and none of the negative aspects.
However, the only way for a guild only tracker to exist is if the game developer builds it in to the game client.
This is what my argument during this entire thread is. Would that be an position you agree with?
DBM was nice but it also felt like it played the game for you in a specific way.
This aspect of DBM is the combat assistant part, not combat tracker.
All a combat tracker can do is tell you what has happened - it cant then tell you what to do, or assist you in doing anything.
In terms of players knowing the content mechanics, I'm from a game where the guild was the only unit worth thinking about. 99% of all raids were done by and within the guild.
The game also had content where there wasnt a single strategy to any given encounter. Each guild would often have wildly different methods for taking on the same encounter.
As such, it was expected that you would need to train new guild members - even if they had done the content in another guild.
The other thing it meant is that guilds were overly protective of the strategies they de slip for content. There were no actual guides at all for most top end raids. This only added to an individual guild needing to teach its recruits, as players had no means of learning the content outside of actually running it - even if you did it the same way as another guild.
To me, this is the best approach I have seen in any MMO. I'm not sure if it was done on purpose in that game, but the way it worked out really did make for the best community.
Literally he just wants them to have trackers so then the next step is it is normalized for everyone to have it besides just being in guild. That way if someone is using one not in game there can't be anything against them TOS wise as they can just argue the game already supports trackers.
Wait. I thought I didn't care about the ToS.
If I didnt care about the ToS as you have said, I wouldn't be posting to try and change it. If I am posting to try and change it, I must care about what it says.
I mean, it cant be both.
I want the game to have built in trackers so that literally every person that wants to use them is able to use them.
I am suggesting they be guild basednsonthat those not wanting to deal with them will have mo inherent need to do so.
That is literally it.
Ill repeat myself from before you will do it anyway and don't care about TOS. But if you can get it in then TOS can't stop you from doing anything at all and it will be easier to use more third party tools.
Classic manipulation on your part.
But the ToS wont prevent me from using a tracker. It cant. We've been over this - it is literally not within the purview of what the ToS can cover.
Even if we ignore that, I have never asked for a change to the games ToS. In fact, I dont think I've even talked about rhen outside of specifically talking to you (and the offshoot conversation with one or two other players that spawned from it).
It isnt something I have ever bought up, because it isnt something that I ever think about. It isnt something j ever think about because it isnt something that could limit me at all.
Edit; fun fact for anyone reading this, it would seem that 483 is the hard limit on notifications on these forums.
My english comprehension isn't enough to properly comprehend that almost triple negative
Steven says that Ashes should not have separate PvE players. There are PvE players who don't agree with that. We can expect Steven to accept that there are players who don't agree and still not implement separate PvP servers.
Similarly, Steven says that Ashes should not have combat trackers. There are hardcore challenge PvE players who don't agree with that. We can expect Steven to accept that there are players who don't agree and still not implement combat trackers.
And while yes, there's more options that just "tracker" or "super obvious easy" one, the discussion around dps meters mainly talks about the harder side of pve and especially the "<10% clearable" stuff. In context of any other discussion it might've been way more than just 2 choices, but in context of trackers you either have no use for them or there's potential use for them. Yes, not everyone would even want to use them, but the potential use is still there.
I'm not quite sure what you mean by potential use for them.
There is a use for combat trackers. There should not be a need for combat trackers.
If the devs implement combat trackers, the will design boss encounters expecting that it's common for people to rely on combat trackers. Therefore, needing combat trackers would be more prevalent than it will be when the devs design expecting most people are not relying on combat trackers.
My english comprehension isn't enough to properly comprehend that almost triple negative
Steven says that Ashes should not have separate PvE players. There are PvE players who don't agree with that. We can expect Steven to accept that there are players who don't agree and still not implement separate PvP servers.
Similarly, Steven says that Ashes should not have combat trackers. There are hardcore challenge PvE players who don't agree with that. We can expect Steven to accept that there are players who don't agree and still not implement combat trackers.
The big difference is that players cant ignore Intrepid and just start up their own PvE only server.
If they could, you had better believe Steven would rethink the situation.
The big difference is that players cant ignore Intrepid and just start up their own PvE only server.
If they could, you had better believe Steven would rethink the situation.
Wait for the private servers after the official game dies. I imagine all the rulesets under the sun will be implemented on the private servers. Incidentally, trackers are against FF14 ToS too but so long as you don't use the trackers to spread information, ban players, block players or lambast players the FF14 devs don't discipline the tracker users. I'm not sure I'd want to dice with the IS devs. I don't particularly want my account banned. I'm normally quite free flow on certain game practices but with Ashes I've waited years to play the main game and also spent a lot of money on cosmetics. I don't think I could face a game ban.
The big difference is that players cant ignore Intrepid and just start up their own PvE only server.
If they could, you had better believe Steven would rethink the situation.
Wait for the private servers after the official game dies. I imagine all the rulesets under the sun will be implemented on the private servers. Incidentally, trackers are against FF14 ToS too but so long as you don't use the trackers to spread information, ban players, block players or lambast players the FF14 devs don't discipline the tracker users. I'm not sure I'd want to dice with the IS devs. I don't particularly want my account banned. I'm normally quite free flow on certain game practices but with Ashes I've waited years to play the main game and also spent a lot of money on cosmetics. I don't think I could face a game ban.
I'm not really wanting to comment on private servers - or what changes I could see Intrepid undertaking if a private server exists while they are still updating Ashes.
As to FFXIV, as far as I can tell from reading their User Agreement, here isnt anything at all about trackers. They only mention of analysis is in relation to them analyzing players - nothing at all in relation to players analyzing the game. All mentions of third party software are in relation to things like RMT, data mining, and other such activities.
If you have the exact language used where they say you cant use trackers, I'd like to read it. If it is in a document other than;
FINAL FANTASY® XIV
User Agreement
Last Updated: 12/24/2019
I'd like to know which document.
However, I will say that in their FAQ they have a list of prohibited activities. One activity is analyzing game data - this is the closest thing I can find. However, a combat tracker analyzes combat data (or character data), not game data. If taken at face value, it is reasonable to assume people could get mixed up between analyzing game data (data mining), and analyzing combat data.
However, not only are these things not the same, but this specific document is a FAQ, not their legally binding User Agreement. The FAQ Prohibited Activities page is basically a "please dont do these things - we're asking nicely". If it is in this FAQ but not in the User Agreement, they really cant actually do anything about it.
No i don't have any paperwork to document that. I just go by the player interactions. Either way, the rule still stands that you can't share the information because that's a bannable offense. All the further information has revealed is further reluctance to gamble with things against Ashes ToS. I will still aim to get a Combat Tracker installed by IS rather than a third party but should the ToS for Ashes not change I wouldn't dice with the devs.
No i don't have any paperwork to document that. I just go by the player interactions. Either way, the rule still stands that you can't share the information because that's a bannable offense. All the further information has revealed is further reluctance to gamble with things against Ashes ToS. I will still aim to get a Combat Tracker installed by IS rather than a third party but should the ToS for Ashes not change I wouldn't dice with the devs.
Yeah, in FFXIV they essentially treat talking about objective data the same as actual harassment.
People can use trackers freely in that game. It isn't actually against the rules, because they cant make it against the rules. So instead, they made talking about it against the rules for reasons that can only be called pettiness.
This is the way Intrepid seem to be heading. Running a tracker will be fine - purely because they cant make that act against the rules.
Talking about your tracker in any official channels (the game, forums and maybe social media) could result in a ban.
So, I will be able to run my tracker. In a group, if someone is sub-par, I will he able to boot them - as long as I dont tell them why. If I tell them they were booted for sub-par performance, and they complain, my account could be suspended regardless of whether I am using a tracker or not.
What this will also mean though, is that o adjective discussion about the game can not happen on the official forums.
The stupid thing is, if guilds only use Discord for communication, they are literally immune to any such rule.
This will result in such discussions happening on third party sites (perhaps a forum, perhaps an unofficial Reddit, what ever). Basically, the community will split - assuming Ingrepid make the same "no discussion" rule that FFXIV has (which is indeed a rule they are able to make).
So, in an attempt to not have the community split over trackers it is very possible that Intrepid will cause the community to split.
Well, I believe we can talk theory all we want. Steven has the thread here under Captain Picard. Thus, I feel quite secure discussing the theory behind the combat trackers. Right now, only the combat tracker seems to be disapproved rather than the discussion of said potential trackers. Not that I would advertise a tracker or expect you to advertise the tracker.
One could just google FF14 and find the 'Act' Devs though. If indeed your 'Act' is the same 'Act' associated with FF14. The tag, colours, font and image matches those Devs though. Not that it really matters. I'm sure in the grand scheme everything will work out for the best.
No i don't have any paperwork to document that. I just go by the player interactions. Either way, the rule still stands that you can't share the information because that's a bannable offense. All the further information has revealed is further reluctance to gamble with things against Ashes ToS. I will still aim to get a Combat Tracker installed by IS rather than a third party but should the ToS for Ashes not change I wouldn't dice with the devs.
Yeah, in FFXIV they essentially treat talking about objective data the same as actual harassment.
People can use trackers freely in that game. It isn't actually against the rules, because they cant make it against the rules. So instead, they made talking about it against the rules for reasons that can only be called pettiness.
This is the way Intrepid seem to be heading. Running a tracker will be fine - purely because they cant make that act against the rules.
Talking about your tracker in any official channels (the game, forums and maybe social media) could result in a ban.
So, I will be able to run my tracker. In a group, if someone is sub-par, I will he able to boot them - as long as I dont tell them why. If I tell them they were booted for sub-par performance, and they complain, my account could be suspended regardless of whether I am using a tracker or not.
What this will also mean though, is that o adjective discussion about the game can not happen on the official forums.
The stupid thing is, if guilds only use Discord for communication, they are literally immune to any such rule.
This will result in such discussions happening on third party sites (perhaps a forum, perhaps an unofficial Reddit, what ever). Basically, the community will split - assuming Ingrepid make the same "no discussion" rule that FFXIV has (which is indeed a rule they are able to make).
So, in an attempt to not have the community split over trackers it is very possible that Intrepid will cause the community to split.
Well, this raises a different point that came up in my DNF duel practice today. I'll try to explain it without too much Fighting Game stuff.
My character has an attack string that basically ends in 'FlameBreath'. If I use this FlameBreath on the frame just before my opponent can no longer be hit by it, my frame data changes, their fall position changes, I can use my teleport and make it impossible to counter (In Ashes, let's assume the equivalent of this is that I would appear behind the opponent if I do it right, and in front of them if I do it wrong).
If Ashes were similar, I would want the Frame Data (but I can get it myself). If an opponent had an attack that for some reason hit me anyway while LOOKING like it should only hit in front of them, now I want a 'Hitbox Scanner' (harder to get myself, but I CAN do it).
This HitBox Scanner would not give me any DPS information at all, but it would be in the same spirit, to ME, as a Tracker or Parser. In my practice, that I am doing right now, I can 'do this combo for 2000 repetitions until I know the Hitbox for my opponent's counter-move', or I can look it up.
It's already clear that some people will say 'do the 2000 repetitions', that's not the question. The question is 'should Intrepid also have a negative stance on Hitbox Scanners since it has Action Combat elements?' and then for my purposes then, would I 'then be not allowed to discuss hitboxes in-game?' e.g.
"We're dying because you keep missing the lastframe teleport on your Flame Breath and dropping into the wrong hitbox for the enemy Tank, we need you to swap with someone who can do it or we're gonna lose this (PvP Encounter)"
Well, we're moving into the territory of Quality Assurance tools, which, trackers were originally a part of. Hit box scanners are definitely Quality Assurance or Debugger territory. The Devs don't want any API Addons so I can only assume a hit box scanner would also be disallowed. I can't say you should or should not progress a Hit Box Scanner, at the very least we should have all these tools on the PTS (Private Test Server) if the A2 Server becomes the PTS. Otherwise, there's little testing to be done except the usual testing which we would do on the live servers.
Well, we're moving into the territory of Quality Assurance tools, which, trackers were originally a part of. Hit box scanners are definitely Quality Assurance or Debugger territory. The Devs don't want any API Addons so I can only assume a hit box scanner would also be disallowed. I can't say you should or should not progress a Hit Box Scanner, at the very least we should have all these tools on the PTS (Private Test Server) if the A2 Server becomes the PTS. Otherwise, there's little testing to be done except the usual testing which we would do on the live servers.
My concern is that for me, 'discussing hit and hurtboxes' happens whether I have a scanner or not. I know they exist, I learn them by just playing the game naturally, I am, in all arrogance, basically a savant at 'seeing them without the scanner' which makes my skill valuable in analysis (cat is credit to team!)
But unlike a Realtime Combat Tracker where the 'way you tell if someone is using it' is 'how detailed information they have is relative to your perception of human capacity' (for observation and arithmetic, basically), it's much harder to judge for a HTBox.
Even more troublesome, I think, is that they're a 'moment to moment' thing. If you ask someone 'please use this ability instead, I think it will do more damage', I think you can get away with that even in FF14. If you 'try to explain the enemy HTBox/Frame Data to someone in chat so that they can improve performance', you normally don't have any way to be less specific.
I think we're jumping the gun a tad. The devs haven't said anything about 1984 styled ban on discussion/communication. Of course, discussion and communication can give players away who are breaking ToS but one would hope a GM actually performs checks on each player before a ban. There is no ToS that states we can't act on our natural knowledge and then communicate the natural findings. I'm pretty sure Steven and the Devs are more open minded than not.
I think we're jumping the gun a tad. The devs haven't said anything about 1984 styled ban on discussion/communication. Of course, discussion and communication can give players away who are breaking ToS but one would hope a GM actually performs checks on each player before a ban. There is no ToS that states we can't act on our natural knowledge and then communicate the natural findings. I'm pretty sure Steven and the Devs are more open minded than not.
I don't quite understand in that regard. What is the GM checking to make the ban decision, if not the communication?
We first started discussing a hit box scanner. I merely meant, the GM would check whether you've used a third party API Sync or Hit Box Scanner if the Hit Box Scanner is not allowed. Yet, I haven't seen or heard any evidence that communication can get you banned unless you are vile/toxic/aggressive/abusive/stalkerish towards others and even then only banned via the current medium.
Noanni brought the ToS statements from FF14 and suggested that Ashes might follow the same terms as FF14, but, that remains pure speculation at this point. I merely suggested that Steven gets notified every time we enter a post on this thread, thus, from my vantage point we seem to be able to discuss matters in a civil manner without fear of retribution. Of course, everything is subject to change.
We first started discussing a hit box scanner. I merely meant, the GM would check whether you've used a third party API Sync or Hit Box Scanner if the Hit Box Scanner is not allowed. Yet, I haven't seen or heard any evidence that communication can get you banned unless you are vile/toxic/aggressive/abusive/stalkerish towards others and even then only banned via the current medium.
Noanni brought the ToS statements from FF14 and suggested that Ashes might follow the same terms as FF14, but, that remains pure speculation at this point. I merely suggested that Steven gets notified every time we enter a post on this thread, thus, from my vantage point we seem to be able to discuss matters in a civil manner without fear of retribution. Of course, everything is subject to change.
Ah. I see.
For clarity, I'm not talking about the type that interacts directly with the client (admittedly building an HBS that does not is considerable work for imprecise data), which gets us back to an unproductive discussion, I think.
Yeah, I mean the old addage of what happens behind close doors remains behind closed doors applies. Certainly, discussion around 'illegal' activities can get you monitored. We're so far out from launch that I'm not even sure what will or won't be required. I think after Alpha 2 we'll be more clued in to what will be required and what won't be required. Certainly, purely from educational parameters some practices are allowed whereby any practical appliances would not be. Everyone learns in individual ways.
Most easy way to judge how strong a stance you can take and know fi there will be backlash or not. If tons of people are supporting it in every post of unique individual, or if tons of people are generally against it or half and half with a certain preference not caring how it goes either way. If you are confident in your stance and make it clear and give people a chance to respond and people agree with you more so than disagree, then it only confirms your stance.
There for there is no reason to stop people from talking about it.
Comments
No, I stated that it will exist regardless of trackers existing or not.
That statement has been a fairly consistent theme throughout this whole thread.
Even without a tracker, the game will have a meta - or a list of builds that players generally deem acceptable to use. I can cite at least one example of this happening in another game if you need me to.
What you haven't explained though, is why someone that is wanting to get through content quickly should accept taking along someone that is not I treated in being efficient. When you break it down, this is essentially what you are saying - that those wanting to run content efficiently are less important than those that dont care, and thus all burden should be placed on the shoulders of those that want efficiency.
What I would like to know is - why do you believe the entire burden here should be carried by those wanting efficiency? Why is none of that burden borne by the player that does not care? I mean, they are the one agreeing to join the group to fill the specific role, why should there be anythi g less than the expectation that this player will do their utmost at that role.
I mean, you are right in that there is an issue when those wanting to do content quickly converge with those not concerned with speed at all. This really is an issue.
The thing is, combat trackers aren't needed for this issue to manifest. Removing combat trackers wont remove this issue, as some players will still want to do content as fast as they can, and some players will still not care.
The part I dont understand though - again - is why you are placing the blame for this issue on those wanting to be efficient, rather than on those not caring.
To me, at the absolute best, it is an issue where each party is equally to blame.
That said, I agree with everything here.
Games like WoW treat players as if they are disposable, and so it should come as no surprise that players of such games treat each other as disposable.
By contrast, players in games where you are more reliant on your community tend to have players that treat each other significantly better.
I mean, if you are forming a group up to run some content, you aren't likely to invite the guy that was a dick in your last group. If groups are limited to server only, that player is going to run out of people to group with very quickly - whereas in WoW, there is a limitless supply of groups for that player to join.
To me, this says that a guild only combat tracker would result in all the positive aspects of trackers, and none of the negative aspects.
However, the only way for a guild only tracker to exist is if the game developer builds it in to the game client.
This is what my argument during this entire thread is. Would that be an position you agree with?
But if you look at the actual complaints with trackers, they are all basically only limited to PUGs.
This is why a guild based tracker is the best option, imo.
Wait. I thought I didn't care about the ToS.
If I didnt care about the ToS as you have said, I wouldn't be posting to try and change it. If I am posting to try and change it, I must care about what it says.
I mean, it cant be both.
I want the game to have built in trackers so that literally every person that wants to use them is able to use them.
I am suggesting they be guild basednsonthat those not wanting to deal with them will have mo inherent need to do so.
That is literally it.
Ill repeat myself from before you will do it anyway and don't care about TOS. But if you can get it in then TOS can't stop you from doing anything at all and it will be easier to use more third party tools.
Classic manipulation on your part.
This aspect of DBM is the combat assistant part, not combat tracker.
All a combat tracker can do is tell you what has happened - it cant then tell you what to do, or assist you in doing anything.
In terms of players knowing the content mechanics, I'm from a game where the guild was the only unit worth thinking about. 99% of all raids were done by and within the guild.
The game also had content where there wasnt a single strategy to any given encounter. Each guild would often have wildly different methods for taking on the same encounter.
As such, it was expected that you would need to train new guild members - even if they had done the content in another guild.
The other thing it meant is that guilds were overly protective of the strategies they de slip for content. There were no actual guides at all for most top end raids. This only added to an individual guild needing to teach its recruits, as players had no means of learning the content outside of actually running it - even if you did it the same way as another guild.
To me, this is the best approach I have seen in any MMO. I'm not sure if it was done on purpose in that game, but the way it worked out really did make for the best community.
But the ToS wont prevent me from using a tracker. It cant. We've been over this - it is literally not within the purview of what the ToS can cover.
Even if we ignore that, I have never asked for a change to the games ToS. In fact, I dont think I've even talked about rhen outside of specifically talking to you (and the offshoot conversation with one or two other players that spawned from it).
It isnt something I have ever bought up, because it isnt something that I ever think about. It isnt something j ever think about because it isnt something that could limit me at all.
Edit; fun fact for anyone reading this, it would seem that 483 is the hard limit on notifications on these forums.
That could be all it is. Thought it was an odd number to be the limit.
I noticed thread views have been broken for a few days, assume it's the same thing.
Similarly, Steven says that Ashes should not have combat trackers. There are hardcore challenge PvE players who don't agree with that. We can expect Steven to accept that there are players who don't agree and still not implement combat trackers.
I'm not quite sure what you mean by potential use for them.
There is a use for combat trackers. There should not be a need for combat trackers.
If the devs implement combat trackers, the will design boss encounters expecting that it's common for people to rely on combat trackers. Therefore, needing combat trackers would be more prevalent than it will be when the devs design expecting most people are not relying on combat trackers.
The big difference is that players cant ignore Intrepid and just start up their own PvE only server.
If they could, you had better believe Steven would rethink the situation.
Wait for the private servers after the official game dies. I imagine all the rulesets under the sun will be implemented on the private servers. Incidentally, trackers are against FF14 ToS too but so long as you don't use the trackers to spread information, ban players, block players or lambast players the FF14 devs don't discipline the tracker users. I'm not sure I'd want to dice with the IS devs. I don't particularly want my account banned. I'm normally quite free flow on certain game practices but with Ashes I've waited years to play the main game and also spent a lot of money on cosmetics. I don't think I could face a game ban.
As to FFXIV, as far as I can tell from reading their User Agreement, here isnt anything at all about trackers. They only mention of analysis is in relation to them analyzing players - nothing at all in relation to players analyzing the game. All mentions of third party software are in relation to things like RMT, data mining, and other such activities.
If you have the exact language used where they say you cant use trackers, I'd like to read it. If it is in a document other than;
FINAL FANTASY® XIV
User Agreement
Last Updated: 12/24/2019
I'd like to know which document.
However, I will say that in their FAQ they have a list of prohibited activities. One activity is analyzing game data - this is the closest thing I can find. However, a combat tracker analyzes combat data (or character data), not game data. If taken at face value, it is reasonable to assume people could get mixed up between analyzing game data (data mining), and analyzing combat data.
However, not only are these things not the same, but this specific document is a FAQ, not their legally binding User Agreement. The FAQ Prohibited Activities page is basically a "please dont do these things - we're asking nicely". If it is in this FAQ but not in the User Agreement, they really cant actually do anything about it.
Yeah, in FFXIV they essentially treat talking about objective data the same as actual harassment.
People can use trackers freely in that game. It isn't actually against the rules, because they cant make it against the rules. So instead, they made talking about it against the rules for reasons that can only be called pettiness.
This is the way Intrepid seem to be heading. Running a tracker will be fine - purely because they cant make that act against the rules.
Talking about your tracker in any official channels (the game, forums and maybe social media) could result in a ban.
So, I will be able to run my tracker. In a group, if someone is sub-par, I will he able to boot them - as long as I dont tell them why. If I tell them they were booted for sub-par performance, and they complain, my account could be suspended regardless of whether I am using a tracker or not.
What this will also mean though, is that o adjective discussion about the game can not happen on the official forums.
The stupid thing is, if guilds only use Discord for communication, they are literally immune to any such rule.
This will result in such discussions happening on third party sites (perhaps a forum, perhaps an unofficial Reddit, what ever). Basically, the community will split - assuming Ingrepid make the same "no discussion" rule that FFXIV has (which is indeed a rule they are able to make).
So, in an attempt to not have the community split over trackers it is very possible that Intrepid will cause the community to split.
One could just google FF14 and find the 'Act' Devs though. If indeed your 'Act' is the same 'Act' associated with FF14. The tag, colours, font and image matches those Devs though. Not that it really matters. I'm sure in the grand scheme everything will work out for the best.
Toxic
My character has an attack string that basically ends in 'FlameBreath'. If I use this FlameBreath on the frame just before my opponent can no longer be hit by it, my frame data changes, their fall position changes, I can use my teleport and make it impossible to counter (In Ashes, let's assume the equivalent of this is that I would appear behind the opponent if I do it right, and in front of them if I do it wrong).
If Ashes were similar, I would want the Frame Data (but I can get it myself). If an opponent had an attack that for some reason hit me anyway while LOOKING like it should only hit in front of them, now I want a 'Hitbox Scanner' (harder to get myself, but I CAN do it).
This HitBox Scanner would not give me any DPS information at all, but it would be in the same spirit, to ME, as a Tracker or Parser. In my practice, that I am doing right now, I can 'do this combo for 2000 repetitions until I know the Hitbox for my opponent's counter-move', or I can look it up.
It's already clear that some people will say 'do the 2000 repetitions', that's not the question. The question is 'should Intrepid also have a negative stance on Hitbox Scanners since it has Action Combat elements?' and then for my purposes then, would I 'then be not allowed to discuss hitboxes in-game?' e.g.
"We're dying because you keep missing the lastframe teleport on your Flame Breath and dropping into the wrong hitbox for the enemy Tank, we need you to swap with someone who can do it or we're gonna lose this (PvP Encounter)"
My concern is that for me, 'discussing hit and hurtboxes' happens whether I have a scanner or not. I know they exist, I learn them by just playing the game naturally, I am, in all arrogance, basically a savant at 'seeing them without the scanner' which makes my skill valuable in analysis (cat is credit to team!)
But unlike a Realtime Combat Tracker where the 'way you tell if someone is using it' is 'how detailed information they have is relative to your perception of human capacity' (for observation and arithmetic, basically), it's much harder to judge for a HTBox.
Even more troublesome, I think, is that they're a 'moment to moment' thing. If you ask someone 'please use this ability instead, I think it will do more damage', I think you can get away with that even in FF14. If you 'try to explain the enemy HTBox/Frame Data to someone in chat so that they can improve performance', you normally don't have any way to be less specific.
I don't quite understand in that regard. What is the GM checking to make the ban decision, if not the communication?
Noanni brought the ToS statements from FF14 and suggested that Ashes might follow the same terms as FF14, but, that remains pure speculation at this point. I merely suggested that Steven gets notified every time we enter a post on this thread, thus, from my vantage point we seem to be able to discuss matters in a civil manner without fear of retribution. Of course, everything is subject to change.
Ah. I see.
For clarity, I'm not talking about the type that interacts directly with the client (admittedly building an HBS that does not is considerable work for imprecise data), which gets us back to an unproductive discussion, I think.
There for there is no reason to stop people from talking about it.