DPS Meter Megathread

This discussion was created from comments split from: DPS Meter Megathread.

I’ve instructed the mods to focus any dps meter threads into a single mega thread to help focus and centralize the discussion 👍

Find more posts tagged with

Staff

Comments

Noaani

Azathoth wrote: »

No. You feel as though a combat tracker is necessary for harder content. That does not make it a fact.

I'd like to know which part - specifically - of the following you do not believe is true.

noaani wrote: »

if a company is able to make an encounter that is on the edge of what players can manage without a combat tracker, then give them a combat tracker and make content on the edge of what players can manage with it, then the latter content will be objectively harder, even if not subjectively harder.

I mean, you seem to agree that a develooer can make content that is on the verge of what players are capable of. You seem to agree that a combat tracker woukd make such content easier. You seem (I think) to agree that a developer coukd then make content harder based on the assumption of a tracker.

What I dont get is that if all of this is the case, then that second encounter has to be something players can't do without a tracker. If it is for what ever reason, then the first encounter can't have been on the verge of what players can do. If it was for sone reason, then the combat tracker can't have made the content easier.

I don't see how these three things could both be true, and am just trying to understand where our points differ.

Azathoth

The part that it is needed or necessary, as previously stated.

Noaani

Azathoth wrote: »

The part that it is needed or necessary, as previously stated.

Oh I get that, I'm just trying to break it down one more level to figure out why.

As above, to me, if the three statements are all true (1, content can be made to the verge of player capability, 2, combat trackers make content easier and 3, content can then be designed to player + tracker verge), then I can't see how anyone (other than dygz, who says whatever he wants wherther it is possible or not) can believe that it isn't possible to make content that does infact need a tracker.

I can understand not wanting it, I can understand thinking it's a bad idea, but I can't understand someone agreeing with those three statements yet not agreeing that it is possible to make such content.

Dygz

Developers can make content on the verge of what players are capable of without the players having access to a "combat tracker". The developers don't need the players to have access to combat trackers to make content on the verge of what players are capable of handling. And, the Ashes devs don't want to give players access to a "combat tracker". Especially not a DPS meter.

Noaani

Dygz wrote: »

Developers can make content on the verge of what players are capable of without the players having access to a "combat tracker". The developers don't need the players to have access to combat trackers to make content on the verge of what players are capable of handling. And, the Ashes devs don't want to give players access to a "combat tracker". Especially not a DPS meter.

That isn't the question I am asking.

If developers are able to develop content that is on the verge of what players can do without a combat tracker (as you just stated), and if a combat tracker makes content easier (as you have stated before), then it stands to reason that if those same developers take the combat tracker in to account, they are able to make harder content. And since the content they had already made was on the verge of what players were able to take on without a tracker, this new content must then be past what players can take on without a tracker.

Now, I understand that sometimes you get lost when the grown-ups are talking, but the discussion I am having here with Azathoth is about what is and is not possible, it is not about what Intrepid are or are not doing.

That said, where is your quote saying that Intrepid don't want players having a combat tracker?

Blackhearted

There is a cap of actions players can do that is set by the game, i.g. gcd in wow, and ticks in rs. You cant expect more actions from a player than the game allows.
Thus all games have a difficulty cap.

Gcd in WoW is set to make the combat more realistic and to allow skills to have visional effects.
Im expecting AoC to have locked animations to replace gcd but the effect is basically the same.

Noaani

blackhearted wrote: »

There is a cap of actions players can do that is set by the game, i.g. gcd in wow, and ticks in rs. You cant expect more actions from a player than the game allows.
Thus all games have a difficulty cap.

Gcd in WoW is set to make the combat more realistic and to allow skills to have visional effects.
Im expecting AoC to have locked animations to replace gcd but the effect is basically the same.

While this is sort of true (raids can hand players items that need to be used during encounters that are GCD independent), it isn't the combat system that determines raid difficulty - it is what the encounter asks of the players outside of the combat system.

If you are in an encounter - any encounter - and for the entire duration of that encounter you chain class based abilities as fast as the GCD allows, you are fighting entry level raid content.

Dygz

noaani wrote: »

That isn't the question I am asking.

Of course, I don't really care what you're asking.
What you're asking is irrelevant.

Caeryl

A combat tracker with .001 second accuracy isn’t necessary by any stretch.

What would be nice to have, is game-appropriate hints when mechanics are approaching. Obvious indications for mechanics. Clear differences in the effects of certain damage types (blunt, piercing, tangible magic, intangible magic). Logical manifestions of buffs, debuffs, and CC.

A person in this world should be able to feel immense energy powering up a spell. A skilled warrior should be able to see the enemy preparing a heavy strike. An enfeebled enemy should be have more muted movement.

If these things are made obvious, there isn’t a necessity for a combat tracker.

As far as I’m concerned, if a player or a group of players, wants to min-max their efficiency beyond the scope of what is required, they should be doing it on their own time, not using a system that feeds them information often without adequate context.

Maybe an attack does X health in damage if you miss a mechanic, it’s a one shot on non-tanks. There are two options here.

1) There is a combat tracker that’s tells a group exactly how much damage the attack does. The raid lead directs his team to have x+100 health and they are free to ignore that mechanic from now on.

2) The exact amount of damage done is not obvious. The raid lead considers pushing up his groups health numbers until they can survive the miss, but they would have to wipe a lot before they could figure out what exactly X is. They decide it’s not worth the penalties and instead improve enough to not miss the mechanic.

Some people prefer to push for option 1, where gear stats and a dps focus tend to be more important.

Option 2 is what I consider healthier, where the lack of knowledge requires either dedication to figure out at the risk of gear degradation and exp debt, so it’s more encouraged to improve via skill instead of number crunching.

Noaani

Caeryl wrote: »

A combat tracker with .001 second accuracy isn’t necessary by any stretch.

What would be nice to have, is game-appropriate hints when mechanics are approaching. Obvious indications for mechanics. Clear differences in the effects of certain damage types (blunt, piercing, tangible magic, intangible magic). Logical manifestions of buffs, debuffs, and CC.

A person in this world should be able to feel immense energy powering up a spell. A skilled warrior should be able to see the enemy preparing a heavy strike. An enfeebled enemy should be have more muted movement.

If these things are made obvious, there isn’t a necessity for a combat tracker.

I agree for the vast majority of content.

However, the all powerful dragon that is the hardest encounter in Verra should be able to cast a spell with just a thought.

Making obvious things obvious is great. The problem comes when everything is obvious. If everything is obvious, then eveything is obvious.

As far as I’m concerned, if a player or a group of players, wants to min-max their efficiency beyond the scope of what is required, they should be doing it on their own time, not using a system that feeds them information often without adequate context.

Maybe an attack does X health in damage if you miss a mechanic, it’s a one shot on non-tanks. There are two options here.

1) There is a combat tracker that’s tells a group exactly how much damage the attack does. The raid lead directs his team to have x+100 health and they are free to ignore that mechanic from now on.

2) The exact amount of damage done is not obvious. The raid lead considers pushing up his groups health numbers until they can survive the miss, but they would have to wipe a lot before they could figure out what exactly X is. They decide it’s not worth the penalties and instead improve enough to not miss the mechanic.

Some people prefer to push for option 1, where gear stats and a dps focus tend to be more important.

Option 2 is what I consider healthier, where the lack of knowledge requires either dedication to figure out at the risk of gear degradation and exp debt, so it’s more encouraged to improve via skill instead of number crunching.

Combat trackers are not supposed to provide context.

They are an objective source of data, and it is up to the user to know enough about what they are doing to provide the context themselves.

A combat tracker that provides context then becomes a combat assistant.

People that are all about stats and gear and DPS with a combat tracker are all about stats and gear and DPS without one as well. These people are almost always mid range raiders at best, as you need context to be at tye top - pure numbers won't get you there.

Noaani

Dygz wrote: »

noaani wrote: »

That isn't the question I am asking.

Of course, I don't really care what you're asking.

Then don't reply.

This is even more true when you quote a post of mine that isn't even directed at you.

I mean, what kind of a person interrupts a conversation between two other people to address one of those people, answers a question that wasn't even asked, and then says "but I don't care about what you are asking".

I mean, it's just bizarre. Obsessive perhaps.

Wandering Mist

noaani wrote: »

Dygz wrote: »

noaani wrote: »

That isn't the question I am asking.

Of course, I don't really care what you're asking.

Then don't reply.

This is even more true when you quote a post of mine that isn't even directed at you.

I mean, what kind of a person interrupts a conversation between two other people to address one of those people, answers a question that wasn't even asked, and then says "but I don't care about what you are asking".

I mean, it's just bizarre. Obsessive perhaps.

Obsessive like an 18 page discussion thread about dps meters?

(sorry, couldn't resist)

Noaani

Wandering Mist wrote: »

noaani wrote: »

Dygz wrote: »

noaani wrote: »

That isn't the question I am asking.

Of course, I don't really care what you're asking.

Then don't reply.

This is even more true when you quote a post of mine that isn't even directed at you.

I mean, what kind of a person interrupts a conversation between two other people to address one of those people, answers a question that wasn't even asked, and then says "but I don't care about what you are asking".

I mean, it's just bizarre. Obsessive perhaps.

Obsessive like an 18 page discussion thread about dps meters?

(sorry, couldn't resist)

Almost.

Was wondering who was going to be first in with a comment along these lines!

This thread is nothing compared to the bridge blocking thread from Archeage though. That thread had exactly the desired effect, eventually - Trion changed their policy, and then XL redesigned the worst zones to remove the bottlenecks.

If Trion and XL eventually listen to reason, I'm sure Intrepid will too.

Azathoth

In all honesty @noaani and myself have been able to maintain an open, unheated/name-calling dialogue. After 17 pages we have not resorted to direct insults. That might be a first for this type of thread on these forums.

grisu

@Azathoth Yeah you probably topped the "change the class names"-thread. I can't remember how many pages it had, but probably not more than 10.

Nagash

The old PvP thread had 27 pages ^^

Noaani

Azathoth wrote: »

In all honesty @noaani and myself have been able to maintain an open, unheated/name-calling dialogue. After 17 pages we have not resorted to direct insults. That might be a first for this type of thread on these forums.

It's funny how easy it is to treat others with respect when they do the same, even when you don't agree on every detail!

I've actually been thinking about the idea of the destructible tracker more, and I have a suggestion that would make it more interesting to me (even if not 100% logical in-game).

Players are able to build or acquire the tracker and the item lasts a week. The method for this is totally open as far as I am concerned (may be give it to a crafting class that otherwise lacks consumables).

From there, it looks at your account wide achievements to determine what it will and will not do for you.

If you have a member of X archetype at the level cap, it will parse members of that archetype - if you do not, it will not. If you want to be able to parse what everyone in your group is doing, not only do you need to obtain this item weekly, but you also need to have one of each class at the level cap (Not sure how many character slots we will have - this could be an issue).

From there, the tracker also looks at what encounters you have beaten. If you want the tracker to be able to time AE's for you, you need to defeat an encounter that uses timed AE's as a mechanic. Not AE's where he emotes before he casts - that is it's own mechanic. Once you have defeated an encounter using timed AE's as a mechanic (or perhaps a few of them), then AE timing is open on your tracker, but where you still need to manually set the timer for each AE you want timed (as opposed to being able to just import the settings).

This can then repeat for every major mechanic that the developers put players up against. They can also make it so that it is used as a form of horizontal progression - the mob that unlocks mechanic X uses a lot of mechanic Y, and without a tracker able to help with mechanic Y, he is too hard to defeat.

There can also be a separation between solo, group and raid content so that all players gain a combat tracker progression path.

To me, this just adds to everyone's end game experience, but as it is also a slow experience getting the full use of your tracker, you have to actually make use of it and learn about what it does and doesn't do - similar to how we all earn our class abilities slowly. This means people that otherwise wouldn't will now be in a situation where they can actually learn about the tracker, what it does and doesn't do.

The net result is fewer people not knowing how to make proper use of a combat tracker, more people knowing how to use it properly, a LOT of work needed for players to be able to use it fully, an enhanced form of end game horizontal character progression, and also provides a boost to a crafting class that may otherwise be lacking.

To me, this is a win for literally every player.

The only question I have is whether or not it would stop people that would use a third party combat tracker or not.

grisu

@Nagash but that wasn't a civilized place to be. Heated is an understatement. Wasn't it even forcibly closed at the end?

Nagash

grisu wrote: »

@Nagash but that wasn't a civilized place to be. Heated is an understatement. Wasn't it even forcibly closed at the end?

it took the destruction of the old forums to kill that thread

Azathoth

I like the thought of a deteriorating tracker, and if only last a week an decays to nothing that would be fine. I haven't placed much thought into those mechanics outside of what I previously listed.

Allowing it to look at the account information and provide related feedback while teaching players it's overall use would be a bonus.

Child Item