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

Nitpick

Tragnar wrote: »

Nitpick wrote: »

People are brutally getting off the trails here. There is 56 damn pages of you guys arguing about something I never knew was so important, cause I never needed it. Since I am not a hardcore MMO player (but I've played my fair share), I can tell you pretty much what will happen. The hardcore raiders will know exactly if what they are doing is right/wrong. No need for meters for that. Experienced players would agree. Us casuals would be fine with using the basic tactics "Apes. Together. Strong." and have a good RPG fun. To be honest, whenever I saw the meters in wow, on streams etc., it took SO MUCH of the role playing element for me, that I couldn't continue watching. From what we know, the game will be heavily focused on the roleplaying element in every way possible.

Do you realize how much you contradict yourself in this paragraph? You never played in any way close to hardcore and yet you claim that you don't need meters for that. Actually you need to have, you just use the best ones that are available. The better the meter the quicker your raid can focus on the mistakes they do.

Also if you have competition on leaderboards with playing better then from the pure design standpoint any roleplaying is out of the window in this part of the game. Does it mean you need to participate in every part of the game? No, just play the parts that you like and make you happy - why do you need to tell others what they enjoy and how they should play?

But don't worry. I'd bet that this game will cure your "WoW-ism" in no time! ^_^

Or, if you all love math so much, how about getting rid of the WHOLE COMBAT SYSTEM from the game, and you can all just press a button and it will "inflict" a number, to a certain bigger number. We can get rid of the graphics too, just KEEP IN THE NUMBERS!!! NUMBERS GUYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYS! DDDDDDD:

Good embarrassment, why to argue with words and ideas when you can sperg out like 12yo.

I understand your disgust with competition, but then the devs should not create the game with risk/reward philosophy, but just to give participation free award for anyone that tries raiding - and definitely no leaderboards.

These designs are encouraging players to use meters and minmax their gameplay - so from my point of view, if the game doesn't want to have meters it needs to drastically change their reward structure and not use any kind of leaderboards

You will not need them IN THIS GAME. Because it won't have any, period. And you won't need any of them. The better a player (with no meter, just skill, common sense, trial/error), the quicker you can focus on your own mistakes.

No, why would leaderboards throw roleplay out of the window? Every swordsman wants to be better than the others. Every mage wants to master the spells better than the other. Of course they'd get ranked somehow. Am I missing a point here, or...?

Do I need to participate in every part of the game? No, not exactly. But will I be able to? Hell yes. I'll play the parts that will make me happy at that given time, be it raiding, dueling or scheming to take over a node. Anything will go for everyone, in one way or another.

I am not telling anyone how he or she should play. All I am saying is, that it has been said already. "No DPS, no ADD ons". I'm just backing up this statement with my personal feeling about it, which goes in it's favor. You asked me a lot of questions on... "topics" you said I brought up, basically, yet I didn't, whatsoever. You make me a bit confused here.

And, if it wasn't damn obvious, I was making fun of every DPS phony, regarding their obsession with numbers, to be the best. Because that's how ALL OF YOU sound. If that sounds like a 12 year old to you, well I've got bad news for you, fella.

And you don't understand a thing, as it seems. I've never said anything about disliking competition. Reward structure has absolutely nothing to do with DPS meters being present or not and I have no idea how you concluded that as a "fact"...? Would love an explanation for that one. I don't see anything in the game designs that would encourage meters and minmaxing...? Not if I don't want to...?

These designs, thanks to the 64 possible builds, with EVERY WEAPON PLAYABLE BY ALL, and 2 different combat systems, is actually trying to do the exact opposite. Giving out so many possibilities, that the meters will become somewhat useless, even if present (for a while, before being banned anyway).

There is absolutely 0 reason, point, sense, anything in trying to implement something that doesn't belong in game, when it is not needed.

Prove me wrong and we can continue this pointless debate with no conclusion anyway.

I just enjoy the process. And if you have time, you can also check my discussion about mounts and artisanship connected to it. Mounts, taming, breeding and all connected to it, is also almost set in stone, but I've also given some (in my opinion) interesting opinions and ideas, that would be fun to implement... Even though it won't happen. Would love to hear your opinion about something you're not so easily offended by. ^_^

Noaani

@Bla814

Bla814 wrote: »

Now... let the adults have a civil discussion

First of all, I have to say I agree with this 100%.

This should be aimed at a few people on both sides of the discussion.

Bla814 wrote: »

I think we just fundamentally disagree on how player behaviour turns out in a situation where the developer strongly disencourages the use of damage-meters. While some people might still resort to third-party tools, i believe the average player will not do that.

I completely agree.

However, those players that will continue to use trackers are the players that my suggestion is aimed at. They are people in top end PvE guilds - the kind of people that would value the knowledge they can glean from a combat tracker over actual in game advantage.

I've seen multiple people argue that gw2 had no combat-trackers early on, whereas you've been saying that you used one pretty much since the beginning. I feel like this shows the difference between the general community perception and the more hardcore players like urself. It seems like a lot of players werent really affected by these third-party tools before they went mainstream.

To be clear, I played GW2 for around 6 months, beginning at launch.

I was not there when they changed their mind on combat trackers, nor do I have first hand knowledge of the effects they had on the game before and after that change of mind.

It was bought up first in this thread by another poster, and so I looked in to it for a good many hours - reading both their official forums, and Reddit, as well as a few other things.

The general community had no real reason to know that about 20% of the playerbase were using combat trackers, and ArenaNet had no real way of knowing who was using one either.

What did happen though, is that essentially two metas formed. People that had no connection to combat trackers had one meta based on assumptions, and people with combat tracker connections had a meta based on facts.

Both groups had a meta, and both groups felt compelled to stick to that meta (well, other than the people that specifically don't stick to a games meta), but one was objectively right, and one was objectively wrong. People using the non-tracker method often couldn't understand why they would come up against "off builds" according to the meta that they assume is the only one, and get completely dominated.

The reason these two metas didn't mix is because "combat trackers were against the rules", and so people using them only talked about it with people they trusted. I never told anyone that I had used a combat tracker in GW2 until this thread - as it was against the rules the entire time I played the game.

When trackers were indeed allowed in that game, there was no sudden increase in toxicity like everyone assumes has to be the case. All that happened is the fact based meta supplanted the assumption based meta, and people that defended that assumption based meta looked a little bit foolish.

There are other things that people wrongly blame on combat traackers that happened in GW2 about the same time (such as an increased focus on top end PvE content), but it is not hard to find places where ArenaNet said they wanted to increase their focus on top end PvE content well before all of that happened, so I am not sure what these people are smoking.

Noaani wrote: »

It is not my fault if people are unwilling or unable to actually defend their stance on the topic.

The argument often takes place under the premise that trackers are unavoidable. As i mentioned earlier, i believe (and many others alongside me) that the general playerbase will not be using those combat-trackers if Intrepid speaks out against them.
Your assumption changes the whole the discussion from "do we want combat-trackers" to "how do we want to implement them". I think that kind of shuts down any counter-arguments against damage-meters in general.

Yeah, the idea that combat trackers will not exist is not a possibility.

Even Steven has only said they think they have prevented most avenues for combat trackers to work. He has also not said that they will be against the rules, by the way - even if that does change and it is against the rules, it is still worth noting that right now, that has not been stated nor even suggested.

As to why they will exist - all you need to do is look at the plans for Ashes in regards to PvE, and you will see that top end PvE guilds will be more determined to have a combat tracker in Ashes than in any other game.

A game like WoW (or EQ, EQ2, GW, GW2, FFXI, FFXIV, Rift, DDO, WAR, etc) provides you with an encounter. You kill the encounter, you get the loot. You don't kill the encounter, you don't get the loot.

In Ashes, the loot you get is not only based on if you kill the encounter or not, but on how well you kill the encounter, or how well you do on the encounters previously.

There is an actual material (in game material, but still) reason to want to know how your raid is performing in what ever metric Intrepid decide to place importance on - something other games do not have.

This means that the argument that many have put forward of "if the target dies, you know you did things well" simply doesn't hold true in Ashes - even *if* it held true in other games. Here, it isn't a case of if you kill it or not, it is a case of how well you kill it.

So yes, there will be combat trackers in Ashes. I see no reason to pretend otherwise, nor to entertain discussion as to that effect. To me, such discussion is akin to discussion as to why the water doesn't fall off the side of the earth if we made the assumption that the earth is flat - the discussion is equally pointless.

They may exist in the same way as they did in GW2 - outlined above - but in my view that would be to the detriment to the average player, not to their benefit.

If combat trackers not allowed to be discussed, the meta that will form will be based on assumptions. If they are allowed to be discussed, the meta that will form can then form from facts.

In both cases, the average player will see that meta and either follow it or not follow it as they see fit. They will not have any idea where that meta came from, nor do they need to know - they just need to either follow it if that is what they want to do, or not follow it if that is what they want to do.

Noaani

@SepiDN

SepiDN wrote: »

These comments in this thread. "people will use third party software if it's not implemented" is like Valve should just hand out aimbots to everyone because otherwise "everyone will use thirdparty aimbot anyways. people will do what ever it takes to maximize".

It would be the same as this if - and only if - every other FPS game out there allows the use of aimbots either explicitly or implicitly. If all other FPS do not allow for their use, then I'm sure no one would think twice that Valve didn't.

@Xenotor

Xenotor wrote: »

When i first saw the DPS Thread i tought it would die down

You realize this thread is a merge of threads that have been alive for 14 months longer than you have been on these forums, right?

I don't recall a time where this thread or one of it's constituent parts was not on the first page.

You can argue about it, cry about it, complain about it. Its not going to change the outcome.

You are completely right here, though not in the way you think you are.

Combat trackers will exist for Ashes. You may not see them, you may not hear about them, you may even think they do not exist - but they will.

Noaani

Nitpick wrote: »

No, if I know about the trackers existence, sooner or later, I will be forced to use it, by the community using it.

This would only be true if you had access to it.

If you are in a guild that has opted to take an actual in game advantage instead of picking the combat tracker as the guild perk, then people can pressure you all they like - you simply won't have access to a combat tracker. In fact, neither will most of those other players.

The only people that will have a combat tracker are the people that are dedicated to killing the hardest content in the game.

On the other hand, if third party combat trackers are the defacto, then people can and will pressure you in to using one, and you won't beable to say that you don't have access. It may turn out that they are against the rules - though that is not the case yet and so suggesting that is an assumption right now.

With the most likely outcome being that they are not supported but not specifically actionable against, then if you are one of the people that could be pressured in to using one, you will be.

As I said earlier, this would put you as one of the main people I am in this fight for, ironically.

I believe that you should not be forced in to using a combat tracker if you do not wish to use one, and I also believe people should not have others track their combat at will.

There is only one way to achieve these things.

Stop comparing AoC, my only last hope for MMO's to all those cookie cutter MMO's, please. It's insulting the title. The whole game mechanic is going to be so much more different, that it's not a fair comparison, anyway.

You are right in that it is not a fair comparison.

All of those other games reward guilds for killing encounters, Ashes will reward them based on how well they kill them. As such, there is more of a reason for a combat tracker to be used in Ashes than there is in those other games - even though all of those other games have large portions of the population using combat trackers.

No, the first party combat tracker is not "literally the only way to get what I want". What I want is no DPS meters in game. Which means, the only solution is to... surprisingly... Not have any DPS meters in the game. I bet you couldn't guess that, even if you tried. And I don't mean to say this in irony, I'm dead serious. You are so freaking focused on the DPS meter, that you are disregarding any other possibility, like... for example... not having one. That is why I said that this post is sad.

Again, combat trackers will exist, probably before you even get access to the game.

Top end guilds have more of a reason to have them in this game than they do in any other game - and top end guilds are the force that drives these things.

Other than saying "I don't want it because I don't want it", you have not said why it is that you do not want a combat tracker as a guild perk based on the outline I directed you to previously. I am unsure as to how that existing in a game could negatively impact on your experience in game.

It is people that have provided reasons as to why this would be the case that shaped that suggestion in the first place - and so maybe if you can say why that would negatively impact on you playing the game, we could alter it so that it does not - but in order to do that, we would need to know why it is that you think it would impact negatively on you - not just taht you don't want it because you don't want it.

unknown

This content has been removed.

Tragnar

Nitpick wrote: »

You will not need them IN THIS GAME. Because it won't have any, period. And you won't need any of them. The better a player (with no meter, just skill, common sense, trial/error), the quicker you can focus on your own mistakes.

Yes you can learn to run marathons without shoes, it is possible and better runners will be able to do it. However you do not see what it would mean for him to have runners shoes. Better players will always be better no matter what and forbidding them from using their tools, because worse players are misusing them is bad.

No, why would leaderboards throw roleplay out of the window? Every swordsman wants to be better than the others. Every mage wants to master the spells better than the other. Of course they'd get ranked somehow. Am I missing a point here, or...?

I truly hope that the raid composition will aim to have the same amount of players of each base archetype. However history teaches this will not be the same, hope for the future but don't forget about the past right? So if your roleplay means you distinguish all classes on spellcasters, swordsmen and all the rest then you will be ok. Unlike many others that you can see in other threads that have already in their mind what specific class they are going to play even with what weapons. So my point is if the guild you are in cares about their position on the leaderboards then you will be asked to use the best secondary archetype and best type of weapons and armor.

Do I need to participate in every part of the game? No, not exactly. But will I be able to? Hell yes. I'll play the parts that will make me happy at that given time, be it raiding, dueling or scheming to take over a node. Anything will go for everyone, in one way or another.

Completely agree, games that require you to participate in every part are just plain bad. Let the game be played by the players to their enjoyment

I am not telling anyone how he or she should play. All I am saying is, that it has been said already. "No DPS, no ADD ons". I'm just backing up this statement with my personal feeling about it, which goes in it's favor. You asked me a lot of questions on... "topics" you said I brought up, basically, yet I didn't, whatsoever. You make me a bit confused here.

I understand your stance on this, but I brought these "topics" up because those topics are closely related to this.

And, if it wasn't damn obvious, I was making fun of every DPS phony, regarding their obsession with numbers, to be the best. Because that's how ALL OF YOU sound. If that sounds like a 12 year old to you, well I've got bad news for you, fella.

You are describing people that want to shit on other people. However literally most of the top-end players strife to achieve mastery in this game. You know the same thing that you can achieve in any field that humans invented - be it music, painting, science, athletics etc.
So if the best way to master this game is to actually look through numbers to figure out what combination of the ingame customization is best for each situation. If you don't want numbers then the game should not show you any numbers, but it does and then we should not be able to measure those numbers?

And you don't understand a thing, as it seems. I've never said anything about disliking competition. Reward structure has absolutely nothing to do with DPS meters being present or not and I have no idea how you concluded that as a "fact"...? Would love an explanation for that one. I don't see anything in the game designs that would encourage meters and minmaxing...? Not if I don't want to...?

Here: Based on how well you do, meaning how fast you can deal the required amount of damage while keeping the benchmark mechanics and coordination you get more or less rewards. With this reward structure will everyone that knows how to correctly use meters tell you that they are a tremendous help especially because you do not have to try things blindly. Boasting for being 1st on the meter and showing superiority over this is totally degenerate. From experience I can tell you that being top dps just makes me eager to help others that are lower in any way - you know how raid teams should work - lifting themselves up

These designs, thanks to the 64 possible builds, with EVERY WEAPON PLAYABLE BY ALL, and 2 different combat systems, is actually trying to do the exact opposite. Giving out so many possibilities, that the meters will become somewhat useless, even if present (for a while, before being banned anyway).

More customization always means that there are more ways to customize in bad way. I am excited about this, but at the same time worry for the sanity of the balance team. There will always be the best setup for single situations - no getting around that. We will see what we will be working with in the coming alpha versions.

There is absolutely 0 reason, point, sense, anything in trying to implement something that doesn't belong in game, when it is not needed.

This is absolutely NOT TRUE! When the whole reward structure is based with loose factor and even scaling factor with how "well" you played then there is automatically a big drive for doing things that help you play better - meters being one of them.

Prove me wrong and we can continue this pointless debate with no conclusion anyway. I just enjoy the process. And if you have time, you can also check my discussion about mounts and artisanship connected to it. Mounts, taming, breeding and all connected to it, is also almost set in stone, but I've also given some (in my opinion) interesting opinions and ideas, that would be fun to implement... Even though it won't happen. Would love to hear your opinion about something you're not so easily offended by. ^_^

I am mostly gameplay focused player. Not that I do not appreciate these topics, but I do not bring much to these topics, because they simply do not interest me. I can of course talk about mount balance and the overall travel system in the game, but honestly I do not care on the way you can breed mounts. I gladly read through such topics if I have time, but I do not think that my opinion has a valid input, because these parts are just not for me in the game

Hystorix

I’m not a fan becuase they create meta gaming quickly then if you don’t enjoy the meta builds 2% better dps etc ... and prefer a build with 1 or 2 percent less dps etc ... you are considered not “spec ing properly” and not invited or kicked from groups ... it’s ridiculous in some games

My inner nerd loves them ... in use it can suck the fun out of a game fast

Hystorix

Roko wrote: »

As long as nobody other than myself can see my damage / healing done; and Intrepid lets me report those that find a way to do it, so they get banned. The same way FF14 does it, i'd be OK with it.

Even if you were the only one to see it ... it’s irrelevant... the damage is still done that harms the game ... that’s the meta is created practically overnight ... then distributed around websites ... then if you are not specced into the meta build becuase of the 1 percent extra dps on a build you hate you are excluded raid or dungeon or guild even because the 1 percent less dps build you love playing even though the encounter is finished with both builds. Is not the meta and considered “dumb to play “ and “not pulling your weight” etc etc ... ad nauseam .. meta gaming is so bad and sucks the life out of games quickly ... to the point they are not fun for more paying customers than the meta gaming crowds cognitive dissonance will never allow them to see

Tragnar

In theory where meters don't exist, the meta gaming will exist in roughly the same amount (there are arguments for it being more and less prevalent), but it will be just more blind.

Meta is created by 2 factors - does the game have loose factor, does the game reward better play by faster completion and/or better rewards? - meters never create meta, they just aim the meta in better.

Meters are just a scope on a weapon, weapons are fired even without them

Noaani

Hystorix wrote: »

I’m not a fan becuase they create meta gaming quickly then if you don’t enjoy the meta builds 2% better dps etc ... and prefer a build with 1 or 2 percent less dps etc ... you are considered not “spec ing properly” and not invited or kicked from groups ... it’s ridiculous in some games

My inner nerd loves them ... in use it can suck the fun out of a game fast

My thoughts on this are that I can't see how it matters.

A meta is going to exist. I don't think you doubt that. It will exist in beta, which I also don't think you will doubt. I'm not sure a combat tracker will speed this up.

To people that just follow the meta, there is no real need to think of if that meta was made using a combat tracker or not.

Where a combat tracker will be useful is in the continued meta - when there are a handful of popular builds, and people want to create builds to take on more of those builds - or specific builds that they are weak to - then combat trackers become an unvaluable tool.

In this regard, at this point, it absolutely will speed things up - but isn't that a good thing?

Nitpick

Tragnar wrote: »

Nitpick wrote: »

You will not need them IN THIS GAME. Because it won't have any, period. And you won't need any of them. The better a player (with no meter, just skill, common sense, trial/error), the quicker you can focus on your own mistakes.

Yes you can learn to run marathons without shoes, it is possible and better runners will be able to do it. However you do not see what it would mean for him to have runners shoes. Better players will always be better no matter what and forbidding them from using their tools, because worse players are misusing them is bad.

No, why would leaderboards throw roleplay out of the window? Every swordsman wants to be better than the others. Every mage wants to master the spells better than the other. Of course they'd get ranked somehow. Am I missing a point here, or...?

I truly hope that the raid composition will aim to have the same amount of players of each base archetype. However history teaches this will not be the same, hope for the future but don't forget about the past right? So if your roleplay means you distinguish all classes on spellcasters, swordsmen and all the rest then you will be ok. Unlike many others that you can see in other threads that have already in their mind what specific class they are going to play even with what weapons. So my point is if the guild you are in cares about their position on the leaderboards then you will be asked to use the best secondary archetype and best type of weapons and armor.

Do I need to participate in every part of the game? No, not exactly. But will I be able to? Hell yes. I'll play the parts that will make me happy at that given time, be it raiding, dueling or scheming to take over a node. Anything will go for everyone, in one way or another.

Completely agree, games that require you to participate in every part are just plain bad. Let the game be played by the players to their enjoyment

I am not telling anyone how he or she should play. All I am saying is, that it has been said already. "No DPS, no ADD ons". I'm just backing up this statement with my personal feeling about it, which goes in it's favor. You asked me a lot of questions on... "topics" you said I brought up, basically, yet I didn't, whatsoever. You make me a bit confused here.

I understand your stance on this, but I brought these "topics" up because those topics are closely related to this.

And, if it wasn't damn obvious, I was making fun of every DPS phony, regarding their obsession with numbers, to be the best. Because that's how ALL OF YOU sound. If that sounds like a 12 year old to you, well I've got bad news for you, fella.

You are describing people that want to shit on other people. However literally most of the top-end players strife to achieve mastery in this game. You know the same thing that you can achieve in any field that humans invented - be it music, painting, science, athletics etc.
So if the best way to master this game is to actually look through numbers to figure out what combination of the ingame customization is best for each situation. If you don't want numbers then the game should not show you any numbers, but it does and then we should not be able to measure those numbers?

And you don't understand a thing, as it seems. I've never said anything about disliking competition. Reward structure has absolutely nothing to do with DPS meters being present or not and I have no idea how you concluded that as a "fact"...? Would love an explanation for that one. I don't see anything in the game designs that would encourage meters and minmaxing...? Not if I don't want to...?

Here: Based on how well you do, meaning how fast you can deal the required amount of damage while keeping the benchmark mechanics and coordination you get more or less rewards. With this reward structure will everyone that knows how to correctly use meters tell you that they are a tremendous help especially because you do not have to try things blindly. Boasting for being 1st on the meter and showing superiority over this is totally degenerate. From experience I can tell you that being top dps just makes me eager to help others that are lower in any way - you know how raid teams should work - lifting themselves up

These designs, thanks to the 64 possible builds, with EVERY WEAPON PLAYABLE BY ALL, and 2 different combat systems, is actually trying to do the exact opposite. Giving out so many possibilities, that the meters will become somewhat useless, even if present (for a while, before being banned anyway).

More customization always means that there are more ways to customize in bad way. I am excited about this, but at the same time worry for the sanity of the balance team. There will always be the best setup for single situations - no getting around that. We will see what we will be working with in the coming alpha versions.

There is absolutely 0 reason, point, sense, anything in trying to implement something that doesn't belong in game, when it is not needed.

This is absolutely NOT TRUE! When the whole reward structure is based with loose factor and even scaling factor with how "well" you played then there is automatically a big drive for doing things that help you play better - meters being one of them.

Prove me wrong and we can continue this pointless debate with no conclusion anyway. I just enjoy the process. And if you have time, you can also check my discussion about mounts and artisanship connected to it. Mounts, taming, breeding and all connected to it, is also almost set in stone, but I've also given some (in my opinion) interesting opinions and ideas, that would be fun to implement... Even though it won't happen. Would love to hear your opinion about something you're not so easily offended by. ^_^

I am mostly gameplay focused player. Not that I do not appreciate these topics, but I do not bring much to these topics, because they simply do not interest me. I can of course talk about mount balance and the overall travel system in the game, but honestly I do not care on the way you can breed mounts. I gladly read through such topics if I have time, but I do not think that my opinion has a valid input, because these parts are just not for me in the game

All I will say as an answer to you, and to @Noaani is actually a partial agreement with what you said, here: "This is absolutely NOT TRUE! When the whole reward structure is based with loose factor and even scaling factor with how "well" you played then there is automatically a big drive for doing things that help you play better - meters being one of them." Of course it would be easier to have a meter for this. I 12000% agree. What I don't just disagree with, but am COMPLETELY AGAINST is the fact, that it HAS to be easier. Why? Let me figure it out on my own. What works and what doesn't. Let us all splash our hands around, facepalm ourselves, till we figure out what works for us the best way possible. I don't need or want any meters around to help me with that. It basically feels like a quest finder when questing. Where is the fun in that?

It just automatically tells you (and will be able to calculate) what is the best you can be/have and that's it. End of the game, you reached the climax. Well done. By making a freaking program for that. Waiting for a game to be released for 5 damn years to reach the best possible endgame (in every update ever) by having a freaking mechanism that can calculate your dps with the build you have (and thus, logically, can calculate the best possible build existing in the game, if you know your way around these things). I am just absolutely, 100% against this. No way of changing my mind about this, sorry for being stubborn.

NelsonRebel

cleansingtotem wrote: »

Bla814 wrote: »

cleansingtotem wrote: »

Literally a lie. No one is forcing you to use them.

It's not that hard of a concept. If damage-meters are widely spread in the community, you will be expected to make use of them and the game will be balanced around having that extra information. Their existance does change the gameplay experience for the general playerbase. Even if you dont have one yourself, other people will use them and that will affect you.

Now... let the adults have a civil discussion without you blurting out random accusations, which seems to be your only "contribution" to this thread.

Most adults I know accept that people play games in different ways and that forcing your play style on to others is wrong. I guess one of us understands that. Also most adults dont take parts of a quote to try and lie for the 2nd time in this thread when you can scroll up and see what was written.

Side note, its always funny to me that people like yourself are so weak willed that you cant stick to your convictions. And instead have to outright deny other people things that they like. Like if you dont want to use meters, don't, more power to you, you will never see me forcing that on you.

Yet you yourself are completely against a notification or aknowledgement of such a tool for the players to know who's requesting the tools usage or knowing who's doing it.

It's not your information. Period

You are quite literally a talking/typing paradox of double standards and hypocrisy of forcing your playstyle on others who are otherwise completely fine with the existence of a meter. Even if we are also fine with them not existing too, and prefer it.

You should take a real look at why you are being so aggressive here

Tragnar

Nitpick wrote: »

What I don't just disagree with, but am COMPLETELY AGAINST is the fact, that it HAS to be easier.

Am I misunderstanding or are you against sharing information? If so then you are against written guides on the internet as well?

If not then I am sorry to disappoint, but unless the release will contain gigantic balance change patch with public seeing it for the first time than on the release date you will have 100% best meta builds available - of course you don't need to go on the internet and use the guides, but you will be dipping in something that someone has already figured out.

Also if the game for you is to just be the explorer that can find the builds for the first time without any available guidence on the internet - then I am sorry, but AoC will not be for you, because it has open alpha and beta (unless they will change their mind)

Every base archetype will have the best recommended secondary archetype with a full build, and people will exclude you if you don't build one of the best meta builds - based on the balance ofc if they are comparable on the release!

Noaani

@Nitpick

Nitpick wrote: »

It just automatically tells you (and will be able to calculate) what is the best you can be/have and that's it.

I disagree that this will be possible with a combat tracker in Ashes.

While it is possible in many games, one thing this relies upon to be true is for the nature of your intended targets to be static. That isn't the case in Ashes.

Look at WoW for example - even though it was considered top tier DPS back in the day, people now know that a fire mage is not the best DPS to take to Molten Core.

In Ashes, that means that if the state of nodes around you is such that you have a fire based raid that you are taking on, you will not want fire based DPS classes. On the other hand, if that node state changes and you no longer have that fire based raid, maybe that would be the best to take on. What is for sure though, is that it will change based on the content you are taking on, and the content that you are taking on will change.

Further, Ashes has the PvP element to it. Maybe you do have the best classes sorted out for the content you are about to run, all that means is that your raid is an easy target fpr a rival guild. They can just build counters to the classes you are running and demolish you. What you need to do now is to build some counter classes to the counters that they have, but that are still able to perform in the PvE content you are wanting to take on.

Basically, the "best build" to run is likely to be specific to each guild, and will be based on the specifics of the content they are trying to run at the time, as well as the general make up of the PvP they are expecting to encounter.

A combat tracker will help in finding these builds, but the specific build you actually run with will have to change often, as your targets will change often.

Of course, all of this will only ever happen if the game has a combat tracker. As Archeage has shown us (the game with the lowest amount of combat tracker use I have ever seen), without a combat tracker, there will be a meta created and people will be too scared to ever move on from it.

Even today, Archeage is using the same meta that was created during beta in Korea in 2012. That game is stuck in that meta, and the developer is in a situation where they are unable to alter the few classes that people play, because people will leave that game before coming up with a new class.

Add in the fact that Ashes rewards guilds based on how well they clear content, and without a tracker, guilds will be even more reluctant to let people run off builds. They will want to stick to what they know works, which is completely understandable.

To me, this would be the worst possible situation for Ashes to end up in - and I am assuming that you agree, based on your desire to want a meta that isn't just automatic.

Hakavay

DPS meters are a near must for late game when you are fine tuning your performance. Having it as optional, and perhaps even for your own damage only, would be an interesting implementation. Now, if fights are designed less around DPS output and more around mechanics then it is less of an issue. For example, if the fights are not dps races with instant-wipe enrage mechanics after a set amount of time, then dmg meters are less important for say the raid leader.

There will always be that percentage of the population that wants a way to measure their own growth. Meters are an option, a means to quantify. Stil, too much information can also lead to toxic behavior as well so there's probably a balance or at least a "does the value justify the risk."

From the other perspective, is min-maxing the perfect execution of some chain of skills really want the game is aiming for or is it rather the right skill in the right moment for the encounter. If the game design leans that way then dps meters further loose value.

Personally, I fall in the pool of enjoying competing with my own performance and that of others but I've enjoyed MMOs where I had no idea how much dmg I was doing vs. others as well and didn't miss the meter one bit. Without a meter, the measure becomes "were we successful?" and that feels like the healthiest way a community can approach success.

Noaani

Hakavay wrote: »

Personally, I fall in the pool of enjoying competing with my own performance and that of others but I've enjoyed MMOs where I had no idea how much dmg I was doing vs. others as well and didn't miss the meter one bit. Without a meter, the measure becomes "were we successful?" and that feels like the healthiest way a community can approach success.

The issue here is that if you are not successful, the obvious question to then ask is; why?

If your question as to being successful was always answered in the affirmative, then I'd agree that combat trackers are not needed. I'd also suggest that the content was too easy.

When you get to the stage where you are asking my question though, answers are only possible with objective data, which is only obtainable with a combat tracker.

Nitpick

Noaani wrote: »

@Nitpick

Nitpick wrote: »

It just automatically tells you (and will be able to calculate) what is the best you can be/have and that's it.

I disagree that this will be possible with a combat tracker in Ashes.

While it is possible in many games, one thing this relies upon to be true is for the nature of your intended targets to be static. That isn't the case in Ashes.

Look at WoW for example - even though it was considered top tier DPS back in the day, people now know that a fire mage is not the best DPS to take to Molten Core.

In Ashes, that means that if the state of nodes around you is such that you have a fire based raid that you are taking on, you will not want fire based DPS classes. On the other hand, if that node state changes and you no longer have that fire based raid, maybe that would be the best to take on. What is for sure though, is that it will change based on the content you are taking on, and the content that you are taking on will change.

Further, Ashes has the PvP element to it. Maybe you do have the best classes sorted out for the content you are about to run, all that means is that your raid is an easy target fpr a rival guild. They can just build counters to the classes you are running and demolish you. What you need to do now is to build some counter classes to the counters that they have, but that are still able to perform in the PvE content you are wanting to take on.

Basically, the "best build" to run is likely to be specific to each guild, and will be based on the specifics of the content they are trying to run at the time, as well as the general make up of the PvP they are expecting to encounter.

A combat tracker will help in finding these builds, but the specific build you actually run with will have to change often, as your targets will change often.

Of course, all of this will only ever happen if the game has a combat tracker. As Archeage has shown us (the game with the lowest amount of combat tracker use I have ever seen), without a combat tracker, there will be a meta created and people will be too scared to ever move on from it.

Even today, Archeage is using the same meta that was created during beta in Korea in 2012. That game is stuck in that meta, and the developer is in a situation where they are unable to alter the few classes that people play, because people will leave that game before coming up with a new class.

Add in the fact that Ashes rewards guilds based on how well they clear content, and without a tracker, guilds will be even more reluctant to let people run off builds. They will want to stick to what they know works, which is completely understandable.

To me, this would be the worst possible situation for Ashes to end up in - and I am assuming that you agree, based on your desire to want a meta that isn't just automatic.

No other game has 64 possible classes, with having all of the weapons playable by all of them. There won't be a meta, because of the countering. None of the builds will ever stand on top, because it will ALWAYS have a counter. That is a given, with this amount of possibilities. I also think that this was their aim all along and thus they thought they wouldn't need a DPS meters, because a lot of classes will be playable for the PvE content aswell. I still don't see a single reason for it to exist, sorry. So, no. Your assumption is wrong, again.

What I hope for aswell, is that the numbers in enemy health (all monsters, boss or non-boss, all of them) would just not be there. Make it a bar, yes. But without numbers. And since there is supposed to be a combat log, I hope they make the data in there appear in percentage, rather than (e.g.) "5508,98dmg in 3 sec."

But again, I have to agree with what you said while answering @Hakavay .

"The issue here is that if you are not successful, the obvious question to then ask is; why?"

And I say ABSOLUTELY! And that is exactly the whole damn point!

My thoughts would be: "Why did I fail? What can I do better? What are the options? Oh my, there is so many. Let me go and try them all, one by one and come up with the best solution using my skill, knowledge and common sense!"

Your thoughts would be: "Why did I fail? Better check the numbers, so I know right away and don't have to spend all my time doing something useless... like... enjoying the game content, blah." <<< that's how I see it.

Still not convinced, and never will be.

I get where you are coming from, but as I said (and you agreed to it), Ashes brings too much new and unexplored content to the table. I think it's VERY wise decision to NOT make any DPS or ADD-ons possible, when testing new stuff like this. You should get rid of this mindset that you have from other games, really. It just doesn't fit in. Genre is same, yes, but so is Gothic 1-2 and Gothic 3... And I wouldn't compare the first 2 to the third... For obvious reasons... Or if you are not familiar with that, try comparing Warcraft III and the remastered version. Again, genre is same... but what about the content within...? I think you get my point by now.

Since I've been reading a lot of the topics in the forums, the most scary thing is people coming from other MMO's with the same damn mindsets, being used to their cookie-cutter experience. That is not just scary, but sad aswell. Especially when you are dead-end focused on "absolutely neccessary" things, that might have no reason to be present in the game, because of the differences.

I'm untainted, non-corrupted, so I decided I'm going to buy access to Alpha 2 <, make vids about it, stream it up and etc. I'm even bulding a new pc set-up just because of this.

My point is, I am not just going to discuss things on the forum. I am going in the game and make sure that I've done all I could from my position as a mere player, to make this game succeed as a "casual player going hardcore, proving WoW-ism wrong", just this once. I'm going to prove you wrong! Hopefully.. xd

Noaani

@Nitpick

Nitpick wrote: »

No other game has 64 possible classes, with having all of the weapons playable by all of them. There won't be a meta, because of the countering. None of the builds will ever stand on top, because it will ALWAYS have a counter. That is a given, with this amount of possibilities. I also think that this was their aim all along and thus they thought they wouldn't need a DPS meters, because a lot of classes will be playable for the PvE content aswell. I still don't see a single reason for it to exist, sorry. So, no. Your assumption is wrong, again.

There are - realistically speaking - 8 classes each with 8 different paths to spec down. There may be 64 named classes, but that is about the same as considering that fire mage from earlier in the thread it's own class
Even so, with that many classes and all the possible builds that come with that, people are going to stick to a meta for fear of being less effective.

Those numbers only open up options to the few people that are more interested in creating a build than in using that build. A combat tracker doesn't hurt these people.

To the bulk of the playerbase, they will stick to a meta either for fear of being less effective, or for fear of being left out.

The only way to was those fears - and thus free people up to use non-meta builds, is to give people access to objective data.

Thus is not *my opinion*, either. This is what has happened in all examples of games with low combat tracker use - the meta becomes stagnant and stale as people are scared to leave it.

My thoughts would be: "Why did I fail? What can I do better? What are the options? Oh my, there is so many. Let me go and try them all, one by one and come up with the best solution using my skill, knowledge and common sense!"

Your thoughts would be: "Why did I fail? Better check the numbers, so I know right away and don't have to spend all my time doing something useless... like... enjoying the game content, blah." <<< that's how I see it.

I think you are over estimating what a combat tracker can do.

If/when I and my guild fail, a combat tracker isn't going to automatically tell us what we did wrong, nor how to fix it.

We can look through the data and find some possibilities of what went wrong, but that is about it.

In order to fix it, we still need to go through that same process you do of looking at what options we have, figuring out which options seem like they would work, and then they them out. It is only after actually trying them out that we are able to get data from the combat tracker as to how effective the build is.

The process is basically identical to the process without a tracker, the difference is we have objective data, you have guesses and assumptions.

I am all for skill being a deciding factor in every aspect of a game, including class and raid builds.

The thing is, skill in this regard only exists in the presence of objective data. Decisions like this made without objective data are just guesses, and I don't consider guess based gameplay to be a good indicator of skill.

Basically, you and I want the same thing - a game where player skill is key.

You seem to think that combat trackers will remove player skill (likely due to experiences in WoW, with combat assistants rather than combat trackers). I think that objective data is essential to skill based gameplay, and objective data is literally the only thing a combat tracker provides.

I feel it worth adding - it takes more skill to accurately read a combat tracker than it does to play the game the combat tracker is tracking. There are also fewer people in most games that can properly read a combat tracker than there are people that kill the top end content of the game.

It is my honest opinion that this is a big part of the issue. People don't understand combat trackers, and so make assumptions about what they are doing.

Demidreamer

Nah skill is overcoming an obstacle that is stacked against you. not a macro you can keep you cookie cutters

Noaani

Demidreamer wrote: »

Nah skill is overcoming an obstacle that is stacked against you. not a macro you can keep you cookie cutters

Combat trackers have nothing at all to do with macros. I'm quite unsure how you could correlate the two.

This just goes further to my point that many people straight up do not understand them at all.

Child Item