Meters, why say no?

Now hear me out before you instantly start replying that i'm a toxic elitist who just wants to call others bad. This is an mmorpg. The dungeons are attuned for 8 players, and raids can go up to 40 players. You're saying that meters are toxic and shouldn't be desired at all. But how are you supposed to find the players that could be better helped to learn their class? Example: You're in a 40 man raid that your guild has been up against for about 3-4 weeks and you cant get any progress done on it. Something is wrong, and you cant figure it out. Lets say suddenly you had meters, and you can now see that a handful of your 40 players needed some guidance with their class. With no meters, this would be impossible to figure out. Without meters we're expected to bash our head against a brick wall for god knows how long until people start leaving or quitting the progression due to frustration. I believe the decision to not include meters because it "promotes a toxic elitist behavior" is unjustified and shouldn't be left to the decision of just a couple people. I find that meters can help improve the game by helping your group improve and grow together, which will in return help people enjoy the game to its fullest. If you don't add meters to the game itself, please consider making addons or plugins for meters a non-bannable offense at the very least.

Find more posts tagged with

Staff

Comments

Undead Canuck

noaani wrote: »

sunfrog wrote: »

Because no that's why.

But what about because yes?

Because the developers said no. They kinda have control.

If you build your own game, you can control whether meters are in it or not.

slanderman

Edit: on phone this forum likes to do some fuckery, sorry for bad quoting

Those who want something that works and want to be competetive will anyways swap to FotM class or pick something that they have seen works. Combat tracker or no

But the true Meta for everything wont be so cookie cutter, maybe for small scale pvp it will be easy to find but larger group comps it wont be.

If we are unsure what the actual dps/spike dmg numbers are, more build variety there will be. Ppl wont be pressured to play "the dps class"

At some point sure there might be guilds trying to min max and test combinations to speedrun or whatever but there will be more build variety since everything wont be clear to the players.

Point being we dont have to know everything, we can work with less information just as well.

Noaani

Undead Canuck wrote: »

noaani wrote: »

sunfrog wrote: »

Because no that's why.

But what about because yes?

Because the developers said no. They kinda have control.

If you build your own game, you can control whether meters are in it or not.

I agree with this stance in every aspect of Ashes other than combat trackers.

The reason I disagree with it here is because it isn't up to intrepid.

The developers of FFXIV and GW2 thought they had control of whether a combat tracker existed or not, but they were wrong.

A combat tracker will exist for Ashes. This is a given. There are two ways for this statement to be proven untrue - the first is to not have PvE content that is worth a damn, the second is to not give players any information at all about what they are doing in combat, so not floating damage numbers, no chat window text, no health bars and potentially, not combat animations that are unique to specific abilities. Each of these could be used to create a third party combat tracker, and when you remove them all from the game, you are left with a very, very different experience - one that I would argue most players would not enjoy.

The question here is whether Intrepid should have control of that combat tracker or not.

I personally say they should - and the only way for this to happen is for them to add it to the game themself.

Noaani

slanderman wrote: »

If we are unsure what the actual dps/spike dmg numbers are, more build variety there will be. Ppl wont be pressured to play "the dps class"

This is deonstraibly untrue.

The one MMO that has had very little combat tracker use, Archeage, had the highest rate of cookie cutter builds of any game I have ever played.

People posted a build, others saw that it worked, people kept that build for 5 years.

Because there were no popular combat trackers, those builds were rarely challenged in terms of their effectiveness, and any time the players running one of those builds were beated in PvP, they put it down to the rock/paper/scissors effect rather than considering if their build needed to be updated.

In terms of PvE, if we get to a situation where there is "the DPS class", then we can all turn to Intrepid and ask them wtf they are doing, because that is obviously poor/lazy class design (looking at you, Blizzard).

If the use of a combat tracker results in one build being required, then all the combat tracker has done is pointed out issues in the design of the game - issues that would have gone unnoticed if not for combat trackers. This is an inherently good thing for players and for the game - and it then leaves the ball in Intrepids hands to see if they will fix it.

Knowing the actual objective truth is never a bad thing, and all combat trackers do is tell you the actual objective truth.

Ryufu

Seeing how WoW classic has become, I am against meters and add-ons.

I definitely do want to have a stat window that shows not just base stats, but things like my own average dps, crit, hp regen and that kind of stuff. I think that is something they already have or are working on, but that is important for me to be able to see the changes whenever I equip new gear to compare.

slanderman

noaani wrote: »

slanderman wrote: »

If we are unsure what the actual dps/spike dmg numbers are, more build variety there will be. Ppl wont be pressured to play "the dps class"

This is deonstraibly untrue.

The one MMO that has had very little combat tracker use, Archeage, had the highest rate of cookie cutter builds of any game I have ever played.

People posted a build, others saw that it worked, people kept that build for 5 years.

Because there were no popular combat trackers, those builds were rarely challenged in terms of their effectiveness, and any time the players running one of those builds were beated in PvP, they put it down to the rock/paper/scissors effect rather than considering if their build needed to be updated.

In terms of PvE, if we get to a situation where there is "the DPS class", then we can all turn to Intrepid and ask them wtf they are doing, because that is obviously poor/lazy class design (looking at you, Blizzard).

If the use of a combat tracker results in one build being required, then all the combat tracker has done is pointed out issues in the design of the game - issues that would have gone unnoticed if not for combat trackers. This is an inherently good thing for players and for the game - and it then leaves the ball in Intrepids hands to see if they will fix it.

Knowing the actual objective truth is never a bad thing, and all combat trackers do is tell you the actual objective truth.

it could go the other way around too, im not sure your example of archeage can be hold as a proof. In gw2 wvw ive made countless builds that "work" when looking at the dps they output but in reality it doesnt.

Good example from gw2: Damage over time builds tend to do more dmg than power builds, but if meta is more sustain and dot removal, that build could perform on the metrics really well but in reality it doesnt work.

This can be learned by experience throught gameplay and not looking at the numbers.

So ofc combat trackers can and will help speeding up the conclusion but it is not required.
I'm fairly sure we will have some sort of dmg meter which is fine for me but all im saying we can work without it.

Noaani

slanderman wrote: »

So ofc combat trackers can and will help speeding up the conclusion but it is not required.
I'm fairly sure we will have some sort of dmg meter which is fine for me but all im saying we can work without it.

We absolutely will have a combat tracker for Ashes - that is essentially a given at this point and isn't really what the debate is about.

The debate is about whether the combat trackers we have should be given the green light by Intrepid or not, and whether Intrepid themself should implement the combat tracker that we are absolutely going to have, so that they can maintain control over it.

As to your point about damage over time builds- a combat tracker may have told you that the build should be good, but a combat tracker also told you that it wasn't. This means that having a combat tracker speeds up the iterating that goes in to always being on the edge of a games meta, as I said above.

So again, a combat tracker means people not wanting to keep up with the meta can settle on a good build earlier, making them happier, and people that like to stay on the edge of the meta (or who like to push that edge) will be able to iterate faster, keeping that edge on the move even more, making them happier.

Technically speaking, we could do without a combat tracker in terms of the PvP meta - but I don't see who that would help. To me, all groups end up better off with a combat tracker than without.

Noaani

Ryufu wrote: »

Seeing how WoW classic has become, I am against meters and add-ons.

I definitely do want to have a stat window that shows not just base stats, but things like my own average dps, crit, hp regen and that kind of stuff. I think that is something they already have or are working on, but that is important for me to be able to see the changes whenever I equip new gear to compare.

The WoW type of combat tracker is completely out of the question for Ashes. That would require opening up specific pieces of information in an API, which Intrepid have specifically stated they won't do.

Ryufu

noaani wrote: »

Ryufu wrote: »

Seeing how WoW classic has become, I am against meters and add-ons.

I definitely do want to have a stat window that shows not just base stats, but things like my own average dps, crit, hp regen and that kind of stuff. I think that is something they already have or are working on, but that is important for me to be able to see the changes whenever I equip new gear to compare.

The WoW type of combat tracker is completely out of the question for Ashes. That would require opening up specific pieces of information in an API, which Intrepid have specifically stated they won't do.

To be more specific, I am against meters because of the culture it has created in WoW. Even things like Discord to create premades for everything has ruined a lot of the original elements people enjoyed about the game.

Meters force everyone to spend half their time gathering world buffs just blow through a dungeon in an hour and then logging off. It just isn't fun when everyone is obsessed over their pars instead of the execution of the game mechanics (people ignoring their aggro or ignoring the raid lead's calls just for extra dps).

I agree there are other problems like the information APIs might gather that are not part of Intrepid. Definitely not something I want to see. I think that is just a gate that will open it up to bots and more automated software to negatively impact the game.

Caeryl

Ryufu wrote: »

noaani wrote: »

Ryufu wrote: »

Seeing how WoW classic has become, I am against meters and add-ons.

I definitely do want to have a stat window that shows not just base stats, but things like my own average dps, crit, hp regen and that kind of stuff. I think that is something they already have or are working on, but that is important for me to be able to see the changes whenever I equip new gear to compare.

The WoW type of combat tracker is completely out of the question for Ashes. That would require opening up specific pieces of information in an API, which Intrepid have specifically stated they won't do.

To be more specific, I am against meters because of the culture it has created in WoW. Even things like Discord to create premades for everything has ruined a lot of the original elements people enjoyed about the game.

Meters force everyone to spend half their time gathering world buffs just blow through a dungeon in an hour and then logging off. It just isn't fun when everyone is obsessed over their pars instead of the execution of the game mechanics (people ignoring their aggro or ignoring the raid lead's calls just for extra dps).

I agree there are other problems like the information APIs might gather that are not part of Intrepid. Definitely not something I want to see. I think that is just a gate that will open it up to bots and more automated software to negatively impact the game.

Efficiency is a perfectly acceptable thing to want. You aren’t required to group with those who are focused on maximum efficiency.

The issues in WoW generally come from the instant queue, which means no punishment for being a dick. When you group manually, everyone in the group has agreed to make concessions in some way. You’ll have to wait on players to get on the right characters, get the right gear, travel to the dungeon, get buffs ahead of time. The group agrees to do these things to benefit the group’s goal.

If your goal is different, you’re always able to gather friends to run it without optimized buffs or optimized gear. It’s up to you to find like minded players.

beardo

I just think its going to further separate good players from bad players if we don't have meters. I pug a lot and there are toxic players even without them. Not having them because it creates toxic players is a very weak argument.

Ive been in elitest groups that have kicked for having low dps. There is a point to it sometimes that some people are ready for the content they are in and some people are not so why hold everyone back for the sake of a few players that are causing wipes. People watching parses and not mechanics and die get kicked as well.

Also saying it will turn into classic wow is a bad argument as well. People have been optimizing vanilla for so long on private servers. The reason it is bad is because its getting no updates. The game is pretty much set in stone. No nerfs to buffs or potions. Every bit of value you can get is put out there on the internet. So people know what to play, how to play it, what all to use, what to spend gold on, and it will never change. Ashes will be updating nerfing classes, nerfing specs, having a lot of new items to spend gold on, and buffs. So people can play what they want and most guilds will accept them because meta today might be the worst class tomorrow. I would never play a live character like a character from classic wow.

The real question is this. How will players now weed out bad players from good? With meters they can see them and if necessary weed them out easily. Now its going to be all about what you are wearing before you enter so you dont get bad dps and if they are meta spec. Which is wrong I feel. Just know there will never be those good old days where you can be absolutely terrible and no one will care about it (in PUG environments anyway).

Noaani

Ryufu wrote: »

To be more specific, I am against meters because of the culture it has created in WoW.

Combat trackers didn't cause the culture WoW has, not needing to maintain in game relationships did.

When you are in a situation where you need others to group up with you to progress, you are restricted to players on one server, and those players can easily refuse to group with you, the culture of a game changes.

Ryufu wrote: »

Meters force everyone to spend half their time gathering world buffs just blow through a dungeon in an hour and then logging off.

Sounds to me like this is more a fault of those buffs.

If meters didn't exist but the buffs did, people would still want to get those buffs. They don't need to know exactly how much they improve things to know that they want them. If the buffs didn't exist but the meters did, then obviously people wouldn't be spending all of that time getting those buffs.

I mean, I don't want to spend half my time running around getting world buffs either, but that has nothing inherently to do with combat trackers.

I can see why someone would perhaps look at a specific situation and blame a combat tracker. I mean, if you go from just playing somewhat casually to then joining a guild that play for at least an amount of efficiency, it is reasonable to assume that this could be the first real use of combat trackers you would see, as well as the first time you have felt the need to get those buffs. It is then easy to see how someone could say that it is the combat tracker that makes people feel the need to get these buffs.

I'm not saying this is what I think has happened in your situation, as I am sure there are many other scenarios in which that same opinion would be perfectly logically formed.

In reality though, both the use of combat trackers and the desire to make use of buffs are both results of being among players that are all about efficiency. Rather than the need to get the buffs being a result of the combat trackers that are being used, both the fact that these people are using combat trackers and the fact that they want you to get the buffs are results of these people wanting efficiency.

It is a perfectly logical misconception to hold, I just hope that in pointing out that an efficiency focused group would want those buffs regardless of a combat trackers existence is enough to show you that while there is some ass

slanderman

noaani wrote: »

slanderman wrote: »

So ofc combat trackers can and will help speeding up the conclusion but it is not required.
I'm fairly sure we will have some sort of dmg meter which is fine for me but all im saying we can work without it.

We absolutely will have a combat tracker for Ashes - that is essentially a given at this point and isn't really what the debate is about.

The debate is about whether the combat trackers we have should be given the green light by Intrepid or not, and whether Intrepid themself should implement the combat tracker that we are absolutely going to have, so that they can maintain control over it.

As to your point about damage over time builds- a combat tracker may have told you that the build should be good, but a combat tracker also told you that it wasn't. This means that having a combat tracker speeds up the iterating that goes in to always being on the edge of a games meta, as I said above.

So again, a combat tracker means people not wanting to keep up with the meta can settle on a good build earlier, making them happier, and people that like to stay on the edge of the meta (or who like to push that edge) will be able to iterate faster, keeping that edge on the move even more, making them happier.

Technically speaking, we could do without a combat tracker in terms of the PvP meta - but I don't see who that would help. To me, all groups end up better off with a combat tracker than without.

i was debating that we dont need combat trackers and we can enjoy the game without them. As i see it without all the knowledge ppl would be more encouraged to play what they feel is neat consept instead of which class performs the best on the meters

Jamation

slanderman wrote: »

i was debating that we dont need combat trackers and we can enjoy the game without them. As i see it without all the knowledge ppl would be more encouraged to play what they feel is neat consept instead of which class performs the best on the meters

Well my experience is limited only to FFXIV and its meters, but the DPS choices usually weren't limited by which classes did the highest DPS, but rather which role needed to be filled (magic/melee,ranged DPS, healer, or tank). I primarily played a "support" ranged DPS which inherently did way less DPS than other pure DPS classes because my role was not only pump out damage, but also boost the damage of my party. People of course had their own preferences or biases about which classes they liked to have in their group the best, but for the most part any class, played well, could be used successfully in the content.

This seems to be more about how well the games classes are defined. How unique the classes are and how well everything synergies. Trackers merely help people better understand the classes they want to play/think is neat. Of course there will be people who pick a class based off the data from a tracker, but then that means they want to play that class.

Noaani

slanderman wrote: »

i was debating that we dont need combat trackers and we can enjoy the game without them. As i see it without all the knowledge ppl would be more encouraged to play what they feel is neat consept instead of which class performs the best on the meters

People not being able to pick the build they want (within reason) is not the fault of the combat trackers.

What combat trackers have done in this situation is aimed a light right at the lack of balance that a given class/game has. If a class is balanced, there should never be a case where there is 'the build', there should always be multiple builds.

No one should ever be able to say the words 'the build' in regards to any class in an MMO.

In a game like Ashes, where selecting your secondary class provides you with the flavor/theme/concept of your class, if one of those is not viable, then that is a fault of the class design, not of the combat tracker that gave us the information to be able to state that the class design is at fault.

If you have objective data that points to something not working as it should, the fix for that is *NEVER* to remove the ability to obtain objective data - which is kind of what you are suggesting here. If you have objective data that points out an issue, then everyone involved should be thankful for that objective data, and the people responsible should fix the issue at hand.

GrinningJack

I say Yes

slanderman

Jamation wrote: »

slanderman wrote: »

i was debating that we dont need combat trackers and we can enjoy the game without them. As i see it without all the knowledge ppl would be more encouraged to play what they feel is neat consept instead of which class performs the best on the meters

Well my experience is limited only to FFXIV and its meters, but the DPS choices usually weren't limited by which classes did the highest DPS, but rather which role needed to be filled (magic/melee,ranged DPS, healer, or tank). I primarily played a "support" ranged DPS which inherently did way less DPS than other pure DPS classes because my role was not only pump out damage, but also boost the damage of my party. People of course had their own preferences or biases about which classes they liked to have in their group the best, but for the most part any class, played well, could be used successfully in the content.

This seems to be more about how well the games classes are defined. How unique the classes are and how well everything synergies. Trackers merely help people better understand the classes they want to play/think is neat. Of course there will be people who pick a class based off the data from a tracker, but then that means they want to play that class.

i see this as something that could happen even without combat tracker. And that is my point, we really dont need to know everything to still enjoy the game

slanderman

noaani wrote: »

slanderman wrote: »

i was debating that we dont need combat trackers and we can enjoy the game without them. As i see it without all the knowledge ppl would be more encouraged to play what they feel is neat consept instead of which class performs the best on the meters

People not being able to pick the build they want (within reason) is not the fault of the combat trackers.

What combat trackers have done in this situation is aimed a light right at the lack of balance that a given class/game has. If a class is balanced, there should never be a case where there is 'the build', there should always be multiple builds.

No one should ever be able to say the words 'the build' in regards to any class in an MMO.

In a game like Ashes, where selecting your secondary class provides you with the flavor/theme/concept of your class, if one of those is not viable, then that is a fault of the class design, not of the combat tracker that gave us the information to be able to state that the class design is at fault.

If you have objective data that points to something not working as it should, the fix for that is *NEVER* to remove the ability to obtain objective data - which is kind of what you are suggesting here. If you have objective data that points out an issue, then everyone involved should be thankful for that objective data, and the people responsible should fix the issue at hand.

Well there is usually the prefered builds in my experience, which has nothing to do with combat tracker. Balance on the other hand is not in our hands, OP builds would still be detected and even if we dont have all the info, devs do.

I feel like my point is not clear to you or you keep arguing just for arguments sake

Caeryl

slanderman wrote: »

noaani wrote: »

slanderman wrote: »

i was debating that we dont need combat trackers and we can enjoy the game without them. As i see it without all the knowledge ppl would be more encouraged to play what they feel is neat consept instead of which class performs the best on the meters

People not being able to pick the build they want (within reason) is not the fault of the combat trackers.

What combat trackers have done in this situation is aimed a light right at the lack of balance that a given class/game has. If a class is balanced, there should never be a case where there is 'the build', there should always be multiple builds.

No one should ever be able to say the words 'the build' in regards to any class in an MMO.

In a game like Ashes, where selecting your secondary class provides you with the flavor/theme/concept of your class, if one of those is not viable, then that is a fault of the class design, not of the combat tracker that gave us the information to be able to state that the class design is at fault.

If you have objective data that points to something not working as it should, the fix for that is *NEVER* to remove the ability to obtain objective data - which is kind of what you are suggesting here. If you have objective data that points out an issue, then everyone involved should be thankful for that objective data, and the people responsible should fix the issue at hand.

Well there is usually the prefered builds in my experience, which has nothing to do with combat tracker. Balance on the other hand is not in our hands, OP builds would still be detected and even if we dont have all the info, devs do.

I feel like my point is not clear to you or you keep arguing just for arguments sake

Devs have neither the time nor the resources to do the theory crafting that players do. They genuinely are not capable of testing every combination to the degree players are.

What I’ve always seen from balancing is players point out something feels too strong or too weak and why (usually with numbers to back it up), with that feedback, devs take time to test those specific things and make adjustments if they’re needed. Without players giving data, devs wouldn’t magically find it. They don’t test every gear combo and every ability synergy besides for functionality.

They’ll catch huge bugs that might make something deal 500x the damage it’s supposed to. But if the advertised damage is 50 damage lower than what it should be, do you really think they’ll catch that without a player pointing it out?

Noaani

slanderman wrote: »

Well there is usually the prefered builds in my experience, which has nothing to do with combat tracker.

If by preferred builds you mean ones that the developers have put in the game as a suggestion to players - these are actually quite rare, and I've yet to see a game launch with them.

This type of thing is usually added to the game several years after launch in order to assist potential new players in getting in to the game, and they are usually simply taken from builds that players make popular.

The other thing you could be talking about here are player posted builds - usually posted on the games forums.

The thing here is, in both situations, combat trackers were used.

Players don't usually post class builds unless they are confident that they actually work well, and that there aren't obvious simple improvements that can be made to the build (ie, moving one point to a different ability being always better). Since people are actually putting their name (or forum identity) on these builds, they don't want to embarrase themselves.

As such, these builds are ALWAYS built with the aid of a combat tracker.

Since the builds that developers occasionally add to the game as a suggestion for players are themselves based on builds that players use, and since the builds that players use are usually builds that players have posted as per the above, even the builds that developers add in to the game as a suggestion for new players to use do infact originate from players who used combat trackers.

As to your comment about balance being in developers hands... I mean, ultimately you are correct, but you are missing out a major part of the picture.

If you've played MMO's much, you'll notice that arnod 2 or 3 months after every alteration or addition to a class, or after a new encounter is added, the developers will push through a balance adjustment patch for it. These patches are almost exclusively results of player feedback that players obtain via combat trackers (not surprisingly, Archeage had very few balance patches like this, and also had very poorly balanced classes).

Most games have 2 or 3 developers at the most that work on the combat system - and even then it is usually only a part of what they do. They simply don't have the time to sit there and sift through the piles of data that is needed to find some of the imbalances in a complex game - but us players absolutely do have the time to do that, and history shows quite clearly that we will spend that time quite happily.

To add more complexity to that, the people responsible for combat for one content cycle may not be the same as the people responsible for it in the next, or the one after that. Staff move around, get new jobs, get promotions, move to other areas of game development - but us players stay the same. It doesn't take much time post launch for any MMO to get to the point where there are hundreds of players that know the games combat systems better than anyone working for the game developer.

Smart developers make use of this fact.

Point is, if a specific player of an MMO wants balance more than anything else in an MMO, then that player should be on board with any player that wants it having access to as much combat information as is possible to gather - as it is players that are willing to assist developers having access to this data actually allows the developers to be able to see the issues in balance that they simply wouldn't have the time or nuanced understanding of specific classes to actually see.

slanderman wrote: »

I feel like my point is not clear to you or you keep arguing just for arguments sake

I'll be honest, if you do have a clear and specific point, then no, it is not clear at all to me. Your point seems to mostly be muddled up with you saying there are some things that you can still do with or without a combat tracker, but you seem to be completely ignoring the things that you can't do if you don't have a one - which really are the only things that matter in a discussion about the point of a combat tracker.

If this is what you feel, then take a step back and reiterate your point right from the very start. Don't quote any other posts (except maybe this so people know that is what you are doing), and don't attempt to answer any questions or rebutt any points made, simply reiterate what your point is if you feel it has not been made as well as you would like.

Child Item