maybe not a dps meter but what about this...

What do you guys think about this idea that I just got...? There is a lot of people who do not want dps meters and there is a lot of people who want to improve skill rotation, right? What if we had a trainig zone were there are those Training Dummy which tells you how´s doing dps doing compare to other players? if ya want to see how you are actually doing so you must go to the training zone and check it out, these Trainig Dummy could copilate all the info from others players and let you know if your dps is low/medium or high (just lets us knows if very low,low, high,medium.etc)

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Recluse74

Noaani wrote: »

Neurath wrote: »

All a parser does is record the fight and show where someone has taken excess damage/death.

Yes, but a combat tracker means an encounter can have more such abilities, each with different conditions, while the developers still have confidence that the appropriate raid is able to identify them all and then work out a strategy to defeat them.

Also, the notion of needing a specific ability to deal with a specific mechanic is an overly simple encounter design - that is not adding complexity.

Neurath wrote: »

The truth remains the boss fights we are seeing are still lacklustre and rather bland anyway, a parser isn't even needed for the current boss fights.

The current boss fights are all placeholder.

It is far too early for Intrepid to be able to design top end encounters - they need to have the combat system nailed before they can do that.

Even then, MMO's don't release with overly good raid encounters. It takes the players a year or two to work out how to best use the games combat system (even with a combat tracker), and it is only then that developers can begin to design really good encounters.

One need only compare the encounter design (not nostalgia) of WoW's vanilla raids to those in WotLK to see this - almost all MMO's get their best raid content 3 - 5 years after release.

So you agree combat tracker are not needed for launch. Awesome!

Recluse74

Noaani wrote: »

BlackBrony wrote: »

Saedu wrote: »

ALL of the good leaders use data to help make decisions.

Yes, this is true. But if you read what @Noaani said, they want a Combat tracker because they want a harder challenged.
I don't understand this. If you want something so complex that you need a Combat Tracker for it, then is not that complex, you're just assisting yourself.

The more data you have, the more complex a problem you can solve. I assume this is a statement everyone agrees with.

Now, based on that, the more data we have with combat in Ashes, the more complex encounters the developers are able to make for us.

Now, the developers of an MMO are able to make content difficult enough for it to be impossible to kill - even with trackers. Based on this, the notion of actual difficulty is a pointless discussion in relation to trackers.

However, what is worth discussing is how much more enjoyable a complex encounter is to take on than a simple encounter - and again, data is key to solving complexity.

So, combat trackers = more complex encounters = more fun.

Sure, sometimes we do talk about difficulty, but complexity is what we )or at least I) actually mean. The two do go somewhat hand in hand, however, Complex encounters will be harder than simple encounters, all other factors being the same. The reason calling them complex rather than difficult is more accurate is because all other factors need not be the same. However, it is that complexity that makes encounters fun, not raw difficulty.

You could have an encounter that requires 100% perfect DPS and healing, but if that is all there is to it, you have a hard, simple, boring encounter.

In reading this, you basically want content that is only able to be completed by people who use trackers. What kind of crap is this? How would you feel if the devs made content that one shot anyone using a tracker? Doubt you would be excited by the fact that you would be held out of some of the content available to other players.

Dygz

I think raiding in Ashes is going to be significantly different than what Noaani likes to play.
Ashes design isn't really about having top end raids at an endgame for the purpose of captivating players while they wait 1-2 years for the next expansion.

akabear

Actually, rather than one shot, I prefer an approach that the community can benefit from for any players that decide to play against the user agreement; the pinata approach.

Turn a player "red" so the next player that kills them and/or the next time they fall, their stuff drops and the nearest player gets the bounty, then ban.

akabear

I think if it is a challenge that one is yearning, which is what the objective seems to be about then:

aim to be the mayor of a node
join a small pincer pvp guild
become a top pvp`er
strategize how to take over a node and succeed with your guild

Raids are fun once in a while, but solo or group pvp, and in game politics trump the complexity any raid can dish out.

Hope that the monster coin events gives a good range of challenge both sides.

Marcet

Figuring out things without a combat tracker is funnier and makes the game more interesting.

You guys are just addicted to combat trackers from past games, and that's all.

Recluse74

Marcet wrote: »

Figuring out things without a combat tracker is funnier and makes the game more interesting.

You guys are just addicted to combat trackers from past games, and that's all.

I have to agree. The argument is they want tougher content... turn off your tracker and you got it

Dygz

They don't want to wipe more than once while they concoct a winning strategy.
I think groups should retreat more often than most gamers are willing to accept.
Should be OK to retreat, regroup and re-strategize. And should be OK to sometimes not clear the entire dungeon/raid. Partial success can be OK, too.

Noaani

Recluse74 wrote: »

In reading this, you basically want content that is only able to be completed by people who use trackers. What kind of crap is this? How would you feel if the devs made content that one shot anyone using a tracker? Doubt you would be excited by the fact that you would be held out of some of the content available to other players.

If you take that post in isolation, it seems like I am asking for all content to be like this.

If you put that post in to context of the entire conversation, I am quite obviously only talking about the small amount of raid content that is aimed at the less than ten percent.

This is a very small amount of content - maybe 3 or 4 encounters in a server at a time. It has been stated very bluntly that there will be raid content for the masses - that is not content I am interested in.

It is perfectly acceptable for the content I am talking about to be designed assuming players will use combat trackers.

Recluse74 wrote: »

So you agree combat tracker are not needed for launch. Awesome!

Raider, in general, are accepting of the fact that raid content at launch is not as good as it will be, so instead we judge the game early on based on its supporting systems and mechanics.

Not having a key system in place (any key system) will just see these players walk right past the game and not look back.

Support for or inclusion of a combat tracker is a key system for raiding.

As such, while I agree that a combat tracker is likely not needed for content at launch, its presence or absence is an indicator of Intrepids intentions for a serious raid game.

Noaani

Recluse74 wrote: »

Marcet wrote: »

Figuring out things without a combat tracker is funnier and makes the game more interesting.

You guys are just addicted to combat trackers from past games, and that's all.

I have to agree. The argument is they want tougher content... turn off your tracker and you got it

You are not paying attention

Noaani wrote: »

Now, the developers of an MMO are able to make content difficult enough for it to be impossible to kill - even with trackers. Based on this, the notion of actual difficulty is a pointless discussion in relation to trackers.

Difficulty and complexity are not the same thing.

We want complex encounters, complex encounters are fun. The complexity of encounter that we are used to having (that Intrepid need to match to bring these players in) does need a combat tracker.

Now, Intrepid absolutely could make hard encounters without that complexity, but as I said earlier

Noaani wrote: »

You could have an encounter that requires 100% perfect DPS and healing, but if that is all there is to it, you have a hard, simple, boring encounter.

That isnt the kind of thing that is going to attract top end raiders to the game.

Now, here is a question specifically for you, @Recluse74

You are not going to be in that top single digit of raiders in Ashes. I think we can both agree on that.

With that in mind, why are you getting involved in a discussion that literally only involves the players that will fit in to that category?

While I am more than happy to throw in my opinion on many topics, you wont see me actively arguing my case in regards to content I know I will not participate in, especially if the suggestions being made have no effect outside of that content.

Marcet

Noaani can literally talk alone for 40 pages and no one would notice.

Vhaeyne

Marcet wrote: »

Noaani can literally talk alone for 40 pages and no one would notice.

If a thread about DPS meters is made and Noaani does not reply. Did the thread even really exist?

Noaani

Marcet wrote: »

Noaani can literally talk alone for 40 pages and no one would notice.

Notice? Yes.

Care? Maybe not

Vhaeyne wrote: »

Marcet wrote: »

Noaani can literally talk alone for 40 pages and no one would notice.

If a thread about DPS meters is made and Noaani does not reply. Did the thread even really exist?

This is clearly a hypothetical situation, but I do think the answer has to be no.

Recluse74

Noaani wrote: »

Recluse74 wrote: »

Marcet wrote: »

Figuring out things without a combat tracker is funnier and makes the game more interesting.

You guys are just addicted to combat trackers from past games, and that's all.

I have to agree. The argument is they want tougher content... turn off your tracker and you got it

You are not paying attention

Noaani wrote: »

Now, the developers of an MMO are able to make content difficult enough for it to be impossible to kill - even with trackers. Based on this, the notion of actual difficulty is a pointless discussion in relation to trackers.

Difficulty and complexity are not the same thing.

We want complex encounters, complex encounters are fun. The complexity of encounter that we are used to having (that Intrepid need to match to bring these players in) does need a combat tracker.

Now, Intrepid absolutely could make hard encounters without that complexity, but as I said earlier

Noaani wrote: »

You could have an encounter that requires 100% perfect DPS and healing, but if that is all there is to it, you have a hard, simple, boring encounter.

That isnt the kind of thing that is going to attract top end raiders to the game.

Now, here is a question specifically for you, @Recluse74

You are not going to be in that top single digit of raiders in Ashes. I think we can both agree on that.

With that in mind, why are you getting involved in a discussion that literally only involves the players that will fit in to that category?

While I am more than happy to throw in my opinion on many topics, you wont see me actively arguing my case in regards to content I know I will not participate in, especially if the suggestions being made have no effect outside of that content.

So many things to answer here..

Difficulty and complexity... If you take away the tracker, your complexity lies in figuring out builds by using COMMUNICATION with other players on how you will build your characters and attack said raid boss...

Difficulty of the raid boss would then be based on how well you built your team.

As far as me being in the top single digit of raiders... No I will not, and neither will you if you follow the rules

How can I prove this? You need it so bad to be good, you are literally begging for a tracker, and if you do not get one, you will use it anyway... this makes me laugh at how dependent you are in them... This is where you say.. "No, it is because it is fun for us" and then I answer "I dont care"...

Edit: Top end raiders do not make the game. Some how, past MMOs you have played, have imprinted this idea that raiding is the be all end all to a MMO. Just like people who PvP get upset when an MMO does not have Open World PvP... the game still lives on without it, just as this will live on without top end raiders if they do not want to play this game.

Vhaeyne

@Recluse74

Howdy,

I am not pro or anti tracker in general. I think if Intrepid does their diligence they can prevent all, but the most extreme users from using trackers. I truly think Intrepid is going to have a very hard time completely preventing trackers. It is a cat and mouse game that ends with Noaani having a second computer with a cam pointed at his monitor doing real time image detection and text classification. The Nvidia Jeson Nano is perfect at this... If he wants a DPS meter as hard as he argues for it. He will have it.

Assuming that he did make a tracker with this physical hardware. It would be nothing to have a preconfigured set up on GitHub. Not saying it is right or wrong. Just saying if pushed to that extreme I don't think there is anything Intrepid could do to detect trackers. They have already stated that multi-boxing is allowed because it is to hard to enforce multi-boxing not being allowed. I am just skeptical that this is a battle that can be completely won.

Recluse74

Vhaeyne wrote: »

@Recluse74

Howdy,

I am not pro or anti tracker in general. I think if Intrepid does their diligence they can prevent all, but the most extreme users from using trackers. I truly think Intrepid is going to have a very hard time completely preventing trackers. It is a cat and mouse game that ends with Noaani having a second computer with a cam pointed at his monitor doing real time image detection and text classification. The Nvidia Jeson Nano is perfect at this... If he wants a DPS meter as hard as he argues for it. He will have it.

Assuming that he did make a tracker with this physical hardware. It would be nothing to have a preconfigured set up on GitHub. Not saying it is right or wrong. Just saying if pushed to that extreme I don't think there is anything Intrepid could do to detect trackers. They have already stated that multi-boxing is allowed because it is to hard to enforce multi-boxing not being allowed. I am just skeptical that this is a battle that can be completely won.

I 100% agree, I know people will have them in game. My issue is, his line of thinking is, if people are going to use them anyway, you might as well just let everyone use them by adding them to the game. As for winning the argument, I am not here to win it, I am here to let anyone of importance who may read this know, that there are people against it. If this was a thread that was nothing but people for it, the argument would have more ground to stand on.. Im just here to minimize that ground the best I can... and Just like him, I will not stop posting till the game launches

If he uses one of his own creation or from someone else, that is his deal. Every accomplishment he brags about will have a * next to it my book.

Noaani

Recluse74 wrote: »

Difficulty and complexity... If you take away the tracker, your complexity lies in figuring out builds by using COMMUNICATION with other players on how you will build your characters and attack said raid boss.

Difficulty of the raid boss would then be based on how well you built your team.

No it doesn't.

I have never once seen an encounter in which a specific build of a character was needed and not blatantly obvious.

Not once. In any game.

There are encounters that require specific builds from one, some or many people on the raid, but this is always blatantly obvious after a single pull.

Honestly, this comment just comes across as someone that thinks they know what raiding is about, but really have no first hand experience at it at all - as this is literally never a situation.

As far as me being in the top single digit of raiders... No I will not

So, why are you weighing in on a topic that literally only impacts those in that group?

Edit: Top end raiders do not make the game.

I agree with this statement.

However, Steven has said that he wants content in the game that only a small fraction of the population will kill (less than 10%). He wants that in the game because that gives everyone else something to strive for - meaning that even the content put in for that small fraction of the game is really there for the larger population.

However, in order to have that small fraction of the population able to take on something that the rest aren't, you need a small percentage of the population that are "better" (in quotes because better in terms of raiding is multi-faceted, and doesn'tonly mean better in the way many think it does) than the bulk of the population.

In other words, the stated aim for Ashes to have that small amount of content that only a small percentage of the population are able to kill does indeed require top end raiders.

Recluse74 wrote: »

My issue is, his line of thinking is, if people are going to use them anyway, you might as well just let everyone use them by adding them to the game.

That is not my line of thinking.

My line of thinking is - combat trackers will be in the game, either first, second or third party.

The best thing for all people involved is if Intrepid have control over combat trackers. In order for Intrepid to have control over combat trackers, they need to implement a combat tracker that provides no less than the minimum people like myself consider necessary.

If Intrepid offer this, then developing second or third party combat trackers simply isn't worth the time, meaning they won't exist.

From there, my line of thinking goes on to detail exactly what the minimum required is - a combat tracker that is available to top end guilds, and can track a full raid and it's target encounter with every action being recorded.

Based on this, my suggestion is and has always been that a combat tracker be added to the game as a guild perk option that is available at the same point as many other valuable things to other types of guilds, so that only the few guilds that really value a combat tracker would consider taking it. When selected, this combat tracker is available to which ever ranks the guilds leadership assigns access to (only leaders, all officers, all full members, all members, what ever works for the guild in question). Further, this combat tracker only tracks the combat of members of that specific guild. If you have a raid made up of two guilds that both have this perk selected, each guild has it's own readout that only shows the members of that guild. Rather than being an always-on UI element, this combat tracker will be a part of the guild window, and those with access can look up encounters from the past 6 hours (if that player was present for the pull). Additionally, the guild can opt to save specific pulls of encounters so they remain able to be viewed longer than 6 hours, and can be viewed by whom ever has access to that guilds combat tracker.

This has been my point for several years. Find an issue with it.

Noaani

Vhaeyne wrote: »

They have already stated that multi-boxing is allowed because it is to hard to enforce multi-boxing not being allowed. I am just skeptical that this is a battle that can be completely won.

This is an interesting point - I had not made that connection.

Multi-boxing is easier to detect than a combat tracker. If multi-boxing is too hard for them, then combat trackers are far too hard for them.

Maybe if those of us wanting a tracker all paid Intrepid an additional $15 a month they would suddenly consider them too hard to enforce as well.

Vhaeyne

Noaani wrote: »

Maybe if those of us wanting a tracker all paid Intrepid an additional $15 a month they would suddenly consider them too hard to enforce as well.

Them allowing multi-boxing is not about the money. It is just because any methods of proving you don't have another account are too intrusive, and if you are a family that uses the same bank information/address you would not be able to make multiple accounts to play together. They can't do anything to determine if you are one guy with two accounts or a dad and his son.

I know you know that. I just don't know if everyone reading your reply will understand that. I have not seen the multi-box arguments in months. I don't want to be the guy to raise them from the dead.

Noaani

Vhaeyne wrote: »

I know you know that. I just don't know if everyone reading your reply will understand that.

Indeed.

And honestly, I only said it because I was expecting this reply. Though I am sure that is something you either suspected, or outright knew.

Child Item