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

Noaani

Dygz wrote: »

And still the 1% raiders will be 1% raiders

Indeed they will.

They will be 1% raiders in a game that supports them - which won't be Ashes.

Recluse74

@Noanni

Do you play GW2?

EDIT: Just saw your reply to the other.. Stopped reading after you told me to shut the fuck up.. so waste of forum space.

Noaani

Recluse74 wrote: »

@Noanni

Do you play GW2?

EDIT: Just saw your reply to the other.. Stopped reading after you told me to shut the fuck up.. so waste of forum space.

I mean, you tell me what I would do all the time. I've lost count of the number of times you have said "top end raids/raiders would", as if you know.

I simply told you to stop telling me what I would do and listen so that I can tell you what I would do - as it is clearly not something you have any clue about - just as I have no clue about what you would do in any given situation.

Not my problem if you can't take that.

Songcaller

Must we degenerate into written abuse on a topic already stated to be a toxic addition. You don't assist the counter argument when you do indeed promote toxicity in the argument for inclusion of a system that often adds toxicity.

Noaani

Neurath wrote: »

Must we degenerate into written abuse on a topic already stated to be a toxic addition. You don't assist the counter argument when you do indeed promote toxicity in the argument for inclusion of a system that often adds toxicity.

Who is introducing toxicity, the person trying to dictate to another what they would do, or the person that has finally had enough of that and tells the person to stop?

Songcaller

If we give in to irritation then we suffer. The whole point of someone being irritating is to make you lose composure. I do not agree with the arguments the same as you but you could maintain the correct procedures and dance through the dares. It is prudent to stop an argument for sure but there are ways to do it without giving cause for grievance.

Noaani

Neurath wrote: »

If we give in to irritation then we suffer. The whole point of someone being irritating is to make you lose composure. I do not agree with the arguments the same as you but you could maintain the correct procedures and dance through the dares. It is prudent to stop an argument for sure but there are ways to do it without giving cause for grievance.

Being told to shut the fuck up and listen is not cause for grievance.

Anyone that takes it as such is the root cause of the problem, not the person telling them.

Being told to just shut the fuck up is valid cause for grievance, however.

I will add, being told to shut the fuck up and listen, and taking it as being told to shut the fuck up - that is providing justification for the person telling that person to shut the fuck up and listen was absolutely correct in telling them to do so.

Recluse74

Noaani wrote: »

Recluse74 wrote: »

@Noanni

Do you play GW2?

EDIT: Just saw your reply to the other.. Stopped reading after you told me to shut the fuck up.. so waste of forum space.

I mean, you tell me what I would do all the time. I've lost count of the number of times you have said "top end raids/raiders would", as if you know.

I simply told you to stop telling me what I would do and listen so that I can tell you what I would do - as it is clearly not something you have any clue about - just as I have no clue about what you would do in any given situation.

Not my problem if you can't take that.

You have told us what you would do on many occasions, so I think I am qualified to state what has already been stated. Sometimes you are blunt, sometimes you dance around the subject, sometimes you deny you would even do it. But the main thing we get, is what you would most likely do.

@Noanni

A top end raid guild will put a lot at risk for a combat tracker - up to and including our accounts. This is because, without a combat tracker, top end raiding will not exist. There may be a hierachy of content, but the content at the highest point will be comparible to the content at the mid-point of a game with a combat tracker.

So, players that are not familiar with top end content will likely not even know that the game doesn't have an actual top end. Players familiar with top end content, however, will be playing a game with top end content.

So basically, we are fine putting our account at risk for a combat tracker, because without a combat tracker we don't really care about our account - or the game (this is why I am about the only top end raider still posting here, the rest stopped looking at this game when Steven said no trackers).

Cocaine is a helluva drug!
-Rick James

See where I get off saying what I say? You are willing to risk your account because you basically do not care about your account if the game does not have content to fit for YOU.

If you are willing to risk your account for a tracker, how I am supposed to believe that when it comes to picking that guild perk offered to you, you will say to your guild "You know what guys, we already have an advantage due to us breaking the EULA, let us skip the guild perk so we keep it sorta fair".. doubt it.

I cannot take anything you say seriously because you do not take us or the Developers seriously when we say we do not want trackers. You just keep coming up with the same few reasons and hopeful compromises wishing someone will bend. And even though it has been made clear AoC will not have trackers at launch, here you are fighting the good fight. I can respect that, putting up a good fight is a respectable thing, but that respect is lost when you say things like you did above. And while that may have been the clearest you ever made it, we already knew what you were going to do.

Noaani

Recluse74 wrote: »

You are willing to risk your account because you basically do not care about your account if the game does not have content to fit YOU.

In the same way a PvP player wont care about a game that doesnt offer PvP,a top end raider does not care about a game that doesnt offer top end raiding.

Is this a new concept to you?

Recluse74 wrote: »

If you are willing to risk your account for a tracker, how I am supposed to believe that when it comes to picking that guild perk offered to you, you will say to your guild "You know what guys, we already have an advantage due to us breaking the EULA, let us skip the guild perk so we keep it sorta fair".. doubt it.

I literally explained this in the post you quoted.

A game without a tracker is not able to supply me with top end raid content - it is straight up not possible.

As such, if I play such a game, I will run my own tracker. This is a point you are aware of.

In this situation, I am more interested in "playing" the tracker than the game, it is more interesting and more enjoyable to me, as the game will not be able to offer up any content that I find interesting.

Losing my account in a game that I am only logging in to in order to get data for a combat tracker, so that I can then compare classes, builds, gear and such (and just generally laugh at the games meta, as was the case in Archeage), is not a big deal.

However, if that game has a combat tracker built in to it, they are able to make content that I would enjoy. As such, losing my account in this game would be a big deal.

It is the difference between someone only interested in Battle Royal games losing their account in WoW vs losing their account in Fortnite. They clearly wont care about one, but are likely to care about the other.

Your argument here boils down to the theory you seem to have that if I am willing to lose something I dont care about for a large gain, I would be willing to lose something I do care about for a small gain. It makes no sense, and just further highlights your total lack of understanding here.

Tragnar

The same story that started with the first mmo forums.

Players with no insight or accomplishments trying to dictate better players how they should play.

First of all - it has NEVER been said that using a tracker is against terms of service, but only that "they think they've close most avenues for tracker to work" - just go and listen to Steven when he talked about them.

Atop of that for the hardest encounters to be truly hard means that all of the mechanics need to be clearly telegraphed to the player so players can identify every mechanic during combat, however if there is an ability that is being glitched/hidden by other mechanics (because the hardest encounters ALWAYS have a lot of going on at the same time) then without the ability to go through the combat log for what happened is extremely frustrating for the players, because every pull becomes a frustrating search for invisible mechanic (or the interaction of few mechanics) that is wiping the raid pull after pull.

Argue what you want, but trackers have found a gigantic amount of bugs in released encounters that just slipped through the dev testing.

Noaani

Tragnar wrote: »

Argue what you want, but trackers have found a gigantic amount of bugs in released encounters that just slipped through the dev testing.

Indeed.

I've used them myself to this end.

Be wary of any MMO developer that doesn't want players looking under the hood.

Dygz

"We will be providing combat data for individual players in their chat window, that players can filter and analyze for themselves. The goal is to mitigate and make the practice less prevalent through the ease that DPS meters provide. Also to place actionable enforcement for players who attempt to circumvent the decision by use of 3rd party programs, for which we will be monitoring."

"The toxicity I am referring to for the meters does not contradict the participation trophy philosophy for the following reasons:
IMO when you choose to exclude someone due to their performance or build (which happens often, not always) you are choosing the easiest path to success. This path is more easily available to groups that parse combat data through dps meters.
The desire to obfuscate (or make less prevalent by not offering this feature) so that groups are encouraged to grow together and help one another become better by more old school/organic methods of trial and error, efforts in watching other people during the raid, by failing repeatedly until success is possible. Now, could people use meters to aid in this task? Yes, but in my experience it isn’t used in this way..more often it is an exclusionary tool designed to separate players.

So to conclude,
My stance on participation trophies is that things should be hard, people should fail, the bitter taste of defeat is what makes success that much more rewarding. Helping other players learn encounter strategy, and fine tuning their play style for high end content is an important part of eliminating participation trophy. Growing together is a good thing, and that includes failing together as a means to drive for success together.

My stance on dps meters, these help automate the encounter, provide an easier way to complete content, creates less failures by eliminating the less experienced or less optimized players, defeat becomes less bitter tasting because it is experienced less often, and the reward is now glancing at a chart and eliminating the lesser players.

I’ve given my opinion and decision on the meters discussion and have read the opposing and supporting arguments."

Asgerr

Neurath wrote: »

Must we degenerate into written abuse on a topic already stated to be a toxic addition. You don't assist the counter argument when you do indeed promote toxicity in the argument for inclusion of a system that often adds toxicity.

Agreed.

If having a parser in the game is going to lead to this level of toxicity as you say, then yeah I 100% agree.

Also, no one is going to convince the guy with literally the logo of a combat tracker as his avatar that combat trackers aren't to be in the game.

I personally don't mind them, but it challenges the good nature of the interactions in game, as this thread seem to be doing, then I don't mind not having them either.

And don't @ me saying, that because I don't care that I shouldn't take it away from others who do want it. You're gonna try to get it there anyway by non accepted means. So do it on your own corner and live happily.

Meanwhile, the rest of people who don't want them, won't have it in game nor should be forced to download and install one.

Littlekenny21

Noaani wrote: »

Neurath wrote: »

If we give in to irritation then we suffer. The whole point of someone being irritating is to make you lose composure. I do not agree with the arguments the same as you but you could maintain the correct procedures and dance through the dares. It is prudent to stop an argument for sure but there are ways to do it without giving cause for grievance.

Being told to shut the fuck up and listen is not cause for grievance.

Anyone that takes it as such is the root cause of the problem, not the person telling them.

Being told to just shut the fuck up is valid cause for grievance, however.

I will add, being told to shut the fuck up and listen, and taking it as being told to shut the fuck up - that is providing justification for the person telling that person to shut the fuck up and listen was absolutely correct in telling them to do so.

Adding and listen doesn't change the shut the fuck up part enough. You could use different words.

Tragnar

Dygz wrote: »

"We will be providing combat data for individual players in their chat window, that players can filter and analyze for themselves. The goal is to mitigate and make the practice less prevalent through the ease that DPS meters provide. Also to place actionable enforcement for players who attempt to circumvent the decision by use of 3rd party programs, for which we will be monitoring."

I'm sorry - this paragraph totally missed me.

Anyway - combat log data is in truth what is essentially needed - because if the filter system is advanced enough for showing you only what you want to know then it is essentially what the meter is meant to be used for.

However it would be funny if that combat log data is limited only to X small amount of entries without the possibility to show more of the history, meaning that you basically can look through the log for what happened only during the end of the fight

All I want from the combat log data is to look at what happened during the whole fight and not just the last few seconds of the fight

akabear

Perhaps these 3rd party learning tools might help bridge the gap
https://education.com/games/data-and-graphing/

Tragnar

akabear wrote: »

Perhaps these 3rd party learning tools might help bridge the gap
https://education.com/games/data-and-graphing/

Perhaps not posting as passive agressive dickhead would be better?

BlackBrony

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.

I find this explanation fascinating. I get your point, and it's completely fair that your ask for it. Allow me to apologize but I'm not as well versed as you're at writing.
I'm paraphrasing here, but I get that raiders as you enjoy solving a complex problem. After all a raid is just that, a complex problem to be solved. But in this case you want this problem to be so complex that you require asistance from a tracker, aking as to a developer needing a programming language of high level to make the solution easier.

You need this data, but you don't always need it. Just a sample, a couple of inputs, like a test data. After you have enough data, and you have found the solution, this data is not necessary anymore, because your problem is solved and you have found the solution to it. And you know it will work despite what test case you throw at it.
So, once you have solved this issue, all of these information will be available for others, so other people might be able to work on this complex problem but basically without all the thinking, because it was done by you.

And I think that's cool, but what happens to less complex problems?
Raiders will take the same approach, using tracker. So, this less complex problem will be shreaded to pieces and all the info is again available to others.

Doesn't this make the less complex problems that don't require tracker now "stupid" problems?
I kinda feel like it will water down other content because raiders already found out the most efficient solution. Maybe I'm just rambling, I don't know.
EDIT = what I mean on last point, is that if you have found the optimal approach, there's no point in others (except for the lolz) to try a different approach if there's one already. So, this content becomes just a cookie cutter scenario with no investigation, problem solving, because raiders did it already.

Marcet

@Noaani

From 2 pages ago you starting to sound quite delirious. I suggest you to go out, breathe fresh air and forget about AOC for a moment.

rikardp98

Dygz wrote: »

"
IMO when you choose to exclude someone due to their performance or build (which happens often, not always) you are choosing the easiest path to success. This path is more easily available to groups that parse combat data through dps meters."

Meaning that the problem does not lie with the dps meters, but with toxic players. The problem will not disappear just because combat tracker (dps-meter) is not in the game. And from my own experience, excluding a curtain player does not happen often.

Dygz wrote: »

"
The desire to obfuscate (or make less prevalent by not offering this feature) so that groups are encouraged to grow together and help one another become better by more old school/organic methods of trial and error, efforts in watching other people during the raid, by failing repeatedly until success is possible. "

As I have stated many times, trial and error is a big thing in high-end content with combat tracker, that will not be taken away. You will still wipe over and over on a new fight, the difference is that you will have the option to see what exactly happened and maybe see why you wiped. And from my experience you "grow together and help one another become better" much more with a dps meter. With out it people will have no facts to base their opinion about what is "better". People will blindly play what the think is good and will not listen or "grow together" with anyone that have another opinion about what is "better". Facts based on feelings is not facts.

Dygz wrote: »

"
Now, could people use meters to aid in this task? Yes, but in my experience it isn’t used in this way..more often it is an exclusionary tool designed to separate players."

From my own experience, combat trackers, or dps meters, is NOT a " tool designed to separate players" but a tool to give me the raw data and the true facts. If you can not handle the true facts then find players with the same mind set.

Dygz wrote: »

"
So to conclude,
My stance on participation trophies is that things should be hard, people should fail, the bitter taste of defeat is what makes success that much more rewarding. Helping other players learn encounter strategy, and fine tuning their play style for high end content is an important part of eliminating participation trophy. Growing together is a good thing, and that includes failing together as a means to drive for success together."

I 100% agree with this point, but again, combat trackers do not magically remove failure.

Dygz wrote: »

"
My stance on dps meters, these help automate the encounter, provide an easier way to complete content, creates less failures by eliminating the less experienced or less optimized players, defeat becomes less bitter tasting because it is experienced less often, and the reward is now glancing at a chart and eliminating the lesser players.

A combat tracker does not automate anything, it doesn't give you a simple way out. Again, it only gives you the truth about what happened. And yes, it my show who is "less experienced" or "less optimized" but no decant person would ever "eliminating" them on the spot. They would instead help them improve, if that is what they want. "eliminating the lesser players" by helping them become better players.

Child Item