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

Tragnar

Dygz wrote: »

If one of the Archetypes is regarded as not what?

People will say they have found the meta. That much is true.
You don't need to "find the meta". You just need to defeat the challenge.
Tank/Tank v Tank/Cleric is irrelevant because all Tanks will be viable.
The whole point of the augment design is not needing "the meta".
All Tanks will be viable because it's the active skills that are most impactful.
The augments allow players to have characters with diversity and still be able to defeat world bosses.
In Ashes, especially, "the meta" is inherently "wrong". What you have, instead, is a consistently successful strategy.

How wrong you are - i could very well see a scenario when a fighter-tank is the best tank, because he can survive anything the bosses throw at him, but is actually the best at making threat and subsequently damage

We have almost no information about the actual game balance so there is no reason to take as granted that their implementation is exactly the same as their proposed design goal

Noaani

Tragnar wrote: »

We have almost no information about the actual game balance so there is no reason to take as granted that their implementation is exactly the same as their proposed design goal

To be fair to Dygz though, he will play the game as if each class is exactly as he currently assumes it is - as he will not have any information to tell him otherwise.

Tragnar

Noaani wrote: »

Tragnar wrote: »

We have almost no information about the actual game balance so there is no reason to take as granted that their implementation is exactly the same as their proposed design goal

To be fair to Dygz though, he will play the game as if each class is exactly as he currently assumes it is - as he will not have any information to tell him otherwise.

There is one thing to play with prelaunch perception and quite another to study how the game actually works

Aerlana

Dygz wrote: »

You don't need to "find the meta". You just need to defeat the challenge.

Again you prove know nothing about endgame in MMORPG
and also nothing about player behaviour around it.

Players will define a meta. dislike this if you want, Steven can dislike this if he wants. it is what will happen, like it was when i discovered MMORPG with Everquest. Like it was in DaOC, like FFXI had.

Meta exist. In souls ? some weapon are better for some kind of fight => meta born.
Hollow knight ? for most fight, the charm that boost spells damage is strong, it was meta to use it (and i never used it ^^' prefered another build)
Counter Strike? there is meta about round where you buy nothing to get more money then buy directly strong weapons and snowball.
Strategy game are full of meta...
City builders ? they also have their meta...

Any RPG with at least a little choice to do to build your character (so... any RPG) have meta. the time you get choice, there will be meta...

Fucking tetris and pacman got a meta !

There will be meta, you are not convinced i know, and because you don't want
You are sure that the fact that IS can do what NO dev ever managed to do.
You said "you can think earth is flat" but you are far closer to flat earther with ignoring what the reality of gaming is.

ALL game are about "you just need to defeat challenges". this is the reality on ALL GAMES EVER (not only video games) ... and there are way far more efficient than others and player will always try to find it. and here i don't speak about 25 years of MMORPG, 50years of videogaming... Poker, and older games proved it

The problem about "false meta" and how hatefull "meta" can be...
A good example is League of Legend : proplayers do things, and all silver-gold consider this new meta... Without any try to understand why they did this. People consider meta like a "how to win" while it is far deeper than this. I never follow meta, i always play "what i like" (sometime it can fit meta but i don't care) but ALL TIME i did my part of work well, because at first i know meta, i understand it, and i can play "like i want" because i know exactly where is my place in group...

And more you have objectiv way to see efficiency of your choices, better you have to prove that you can do work (even if you don't have a "meta build" ) This is where combat tracker can be usefull : helping me to have better efficiency in game by learning how to play my build, adapt it, see where i do mistakes in rotation, etc. AND proving to all that my build, even if maybe off-meta, can do its work... better that lot of people brainlessly following the holy meta without understanding it... and without training their gameplay (they play the top DPS why train, they will be on top... or not)

Dygz

Tragnar wrote: »

How wrong you are - i could very well see a scenario when a fighter-tank is the best tank, because he can survive anything the bosses throw at him, but is actually the best at making threat and subsequently damage

We have almost no information about the actual game balance so there is no reason to take as granted that their implementation is exactly the same as their proposed design goal

"Best Tank" is irrelevant.
We have some info about the actual game balance.
"Any Primary Tank is viable...and absolutely not laughable... for an upper end raid."
---Steven

If the implementation doesn't meet the design, the game is a failure, and therefore, the balance will be moot.

Noaani

Dygz wrote: »

"Best Tank" is irrelevant.

In what world?

Aerlana

Dygz wrote: »

"Best Tank" is irrelevant.

For you. for some players. Yes, you are totally right
For others, and they are also a lot, this is totally revelant.

I mock people following brainlessly meta, but... it is how they like to play.

You speak only with your own point of vue, how YOU consider we all should play a game...
So sure, you can't understand how positiv a combat tracker could be, because, for your experience, all good point are meaningless because you don't care using it...

Try, one time, to learn how other players than you will play AoC... There will be many different kind, with totally different expectations.

Fairtale

Tragnar wrote: »

mr n0body wrote: »

In an ideal game, a warrior using a 2h weapon and a warrior dual-wielding should both do the same DPS when played correctly. When those conditions are true, then the DPS meter is not needed.

Those are not the only conditions - what if the DPS difference is different at various skill levels? For example if the ceiling is mathematically the same, but dual wielding has much lower skill floor which makes the average person perform way better with dual wielding spec instead of 2h spec

That is a very good point, well said. As a counterpoint: doing more dps doesn't always mean being a better player. The best example would be players who stand in fire, but then end up doing more dps since they didn't dodge. But maybe in those cases the fire should do enough damage to kill anyone that ignores it.

Noaani wrote: »

A two handed character dealing fewer, larger hits should be better against a heavily armored target, while a dual wielding character dealing faster, smaller hits should be better against a lightly or unarmored target.

that is true. Bigger weapons could also have a higher chance to miss targets that have high dodge.

Tragnar

mr n0body wrote: »

Tragnar wrote: »

mr n0body wrote: »

In an ideal game, a warrior using a 2h weapon and a warrior dual-wielding should both do the same DPS when played correctly. When those conditions are true, then the DPS meter is not needed.

Those are not the only conditions - what if the DPS difference is different at various skill levels? For example if the ceiling is mathematically the same, but dual wielding has much lower skill floor which makes the average person perform way better with dual wielding spec instead of 2h spec

That is a very good point, well said. As a counterpoint: doing more dps doesn't always mean being a better player. The best example would be players who stand in fire, but then end up doing more dps since they didn't dodge. But maybe in those cases the fire should do enough damage to kill anyone that ignores it.

Every player has his own "skill budget" which determines how good of a player he is - usually if that player plays extremely hard class to execute mechanically then he has much less focus left on doing all other stuff in the encounters (pvp or pve)

so if you choose an easy class to play that has the same dps ceiling as any other then you will have much better results than if you played a hard class. And the "quality" of a player is usually determined by how well he can do everything he needs to at the same time as he is piloting his class (this is however a teritorium foreign to mmo's because they have really bad balance and usually there are straight up better classes)

Littlekenny21

mr n0body wrote: »

Tragnar wrote: »

mr n0body wrote: »

In an ideal game, a warrior using a 2h weapon and a warrior dual-wielding should both do the same DPS when played correctly. When those conditions are true, then the DPS meter is not needed.

Those are not the only conditions - what if the DPS difference is different at various skill levels? For example if the ceiling is mathematically the same, but dual wielding has much lower skill floor which makes the average person perform way better with dual wielding spec instead of 2h spec

That is a very good point, well said. As a counterpoint: doing more dps doesn't always mean being a better player. The best example would be players who stand in fire, but then end up doing more dps since they didn't dodge. But maybe in those cases the fire should do enough damage to kill anyone that ignores it.

Noaani wrote: »

A two handed character dealing fewer, larger hits should be better against a heavily armored target, while a dual wielding character dealing faster, smaller hits should be better against a lightly or unarmored target.

that is true. Bigger weapons could also have a higher chance to miss targets that have high dodge.

A combat tracker instead of a DPS meter would show if you were standing in the fire.
There is always the danger of people only looking at the DPS and just standing in the fire draining the resources from the healers.

Tragnar

Littlekenny21 wrote: »

mr n0body wrote: »

Tragnar wrote: »

mr n0body wrote: »

In an ideal game, a warrior using a 2h weapon and a warrior dual-wielding should both do the same DPS when played correctly. When those conditions are true, then the DPS meter is not needed.

Those are not the only conditions - what if the DPS difference is different at various skill levels? For example if the ceiling is mathematically the same, but dual wielding has much lower skill floor which makes the average person perform way better with dual wielding spec instead of 2h spec

That is a very good point, well said. As a counterpoint: doing more dps doesn't always mean being a better player. The best example would be players who stand in fire, but then end up doing more dps since they didn't dodge. But maybe in those cases the fire should do enough damage to kill anyone that ignores it.

Noaani wrote: »

A two handed character dealing fewer, larger hits should be better against a heavily armored target, while a dual wielding character dealing faster, smaller hits should be better against a lightly or unarmored target.

that is true. Bigger weapons could also have a higher chance to miss targets that have high dodge.

A combat tracker instead of a DPS meter would show if you were standing in the fire.
There is always the danger of people only looking at the DPS and just standing in the fire draining the resources from the healers.

combat tracker tells you retroactively that you stood in fire - almost nobody configures it so it shows when you are in a fire, because that is borderline a combat assist - which we all agree that we do not want

Dygz

Aerlana wrote: »

You can't understand how positiv a combat tracker could be, because, for your experience, all good point are meaningless because you don't care using it...

Try, one time, to learn how other players than you will play AoC... There will be many different kind, with totally different expectations.

Uh. Nope.
It's because the bad outweighs the good.
Just as, for you, the good outweighs the bad.
For this game, the devs don't agree with you.

Some people can believe that "best Tank" matters.
Just as some people can believe that the Earth is flat.
What they believe doesn't change reality.
And the reality is going to be dependent on the game design.
And the game is being designed such that "best Tank" is objectively irrelevant because any Primary Archetype Tank will be viable in upper end raids.

Tragnar

Dygz wrote: »

Aerlana wrote: »

You can't understand how positiv a combat tracker could be, because, for your experience, all good point are meaningless because you don't care using it...

Try, one time, to learn how other players than you will play AoC... There will be many different kind, with totally different expectations.

Uh. Nope.
It's because the bad outweighs the good.
Just as, for you, the good outweighs the bad.
For this game, the devs don't agree with you.

Some people can believe that "best Tank" matters.
Just as some people can believe that the Earth is flat.
What they believe doesn't change reality.
And the reality is going to be dependent on the game design.
And the game is being designed such that "best Tank" is objectively irrelevant because any Primary Archetype Tank will be viable in upper end raids.

You are completely wrong in here - reality is dependant on the implementation of a game design

game design is like a building construction plan - there are many cases when the construction plan is flawed and the building created with those plans falls or needs to be taken down, because of a flaw that can make it fall

If you can't accept the FACT that plans are not equal to reality then there is no help for you

Dygz

Sure. But if the implementation fails to meet the design, the game fails - so that point is moot.
If the devs end up just re-creating WoW, sure, they can include DPS meters. No one will care because no one will be playing that game.
Arguing for DPS meters in Ashes is like arguing for separate PvE-Only servers.

Aerlana

Dygz wrote: »

And the game is being designed such that "best Tank" is objectively irrelevant because any Primary Archetype Tank will be viable in upper end raids.

All viable : the least i hope for any MMORPG... All viable means only that you can use all to fight boss, they will all be strong enough to kill the boss. This is the really least we can expect from any MMORPG.
but while all viable doesnt mean all equal... So even if your game get all class viable in their focused role, it doesnt avoid to get best tank, best DPS, etc

All tank are viable on WoW, or FFXIV. all DPS are viable, and all heal are viable.
it means, for FFXIV, time you do a team with 2 different tank, 2 different heal, 2 different melee DPS, 1 magic DPS and 1 physical range DPS, you can beat any content. It is real, totally real.

BUT while the 4 tanks are viable, there is one best than the other, and one worst than the other.
Let imagine 2 tank build : One will have bigger mitigation/selfhealing. the other will be better to generate enimity. Both are same DPS
both was used as main tank to kill the hardest boss of the game. and both were in team which managed this.
So, both tank are totally viable.
BUT, they are not equal, the simple fact the tank with lowest enimity was totally viable to kill this boss makes him factually better... Why ? you don't need more eninimty than enough to remain first on the boss. more than this is useless. So you don't need the enimity bonus from the tank better on it. On the other side, the more mitigation/selfheal you get, the less healer got work to do... making their work easier and/or able to help a little more the DPS

Both those two tanks are viable, one is better than the other

What would make "best tank" is objectively revelant would be to have all tank build perfectly equal : sale hate generation, same mitigation/selfheal, same DPS, same utilities (so, the 8 classes, and ALL combinaison of augments on the skills). It will NEVER happen in any MMORPG.

because you use comparison without knowing what you speak :

Some people can believe that all viable means all equal.
Just as some people can believe that the Earth is flat.

But i invite me to prove me wrong. show me one good MMORPG, be it young or old, with more than one tank, where all the tanks were equal. Where there wasn't one tank stronger than the other.
And "AoC will be" is not a good answer, because it doesn't exist, neither you or i or any dev can prove it will be the case.
And i say "all equal" not "all viable"

From the begining of this discussion you NEVER tried to prove anything, you just send some affirmation without any example, anything to prove this affirmation is real. But you forget that we know that "flat earther" are false because there are factual proof they are wrong.
I gave factual situation all people on MMORPG was able to see.

Give me a mmorpg where people didn't use anykind of meta (while you prove it already a wrong statement for AoC...)
Give me a mmorpg where all tank are equal, one were all DPS are equal.
Give... to support what you say, any kind of factual proof. please... do it at least once.

And for "devs disagree with you" Jeffrey bard was from EQ2, some other in the team now are from EQ2... *looks at ACT which was born for... EQ2 1 years after release* You sure?

Dygz wrote: »

Sure. But if the implementation fails to meet the design, the game fails

AAAAAAND... It is as true as the earth is flat :

Implementation can fails, and the game live really well. Example ?
FFXI : implementation of ninja, a DPS job... the implementation failed, because people used it more to do the best tank on many boss instead of a DPS. Did the game failed ? hell no...

Another example outside MMORPG, :
Nunu was build to be a Top-laner originally. it was when nearly all character was meant to have one specific role (toplane, jungle, midlane/APcarry, ADcarry, support).
One day, a proteam used nunu not as top, but as support... and then, without riot doing any patch for it, people considered nunu top out-of-meta.
Failed implementation, not failed game.

Tragnar

Dygz wrote: »

Sure. But if the implementation fails to meet the design, the game fails - so that point is moot.

Then by your own statement all of the most successful games failed, because they didn't meet the design - you literally are taking design goals for something they are not. Design goals in games is the same thing as sketches for artists - you want to have a general idea for the project you are working on, but you still have a lot of leeway to even change the design goals/sketches as you get further into it.

STOP EXPECTING UTOPIA AND PROCLAIMING THE GAME FAILED WHEN IT DID NOT ACHIEVE IT

If the devs end up just re-creating WoW, sure, they can include DPS meters. No one will care because no one will be playing that game.
Arguing for DPS meters in Ashes is like arguing for separate PvE-Only servers.

You are completely wrong in this - if anything the last few weeks showed is that players want to have in an mmo a lot of content, that respects their time and investment without bullshit whale exploiting monetization - dps meters are not at all comparable in importancy with these topics, but are inevitable with big population

Wingtzu

dps meters are not at all comparable in importancy with these topics, but are inevitable with big population

I couldn't disagree more. Easy-access dps meters will inevitably bring about a toxic game culture hellbent on optimizing the fun out of the game. For proof you need only look to the difference in the WoW and FFIV communities.

There is nothing "inevitable" about large MMOs and some imaginary need to have hard numbers to crunch.

Tragnar

Wingtzu wrote: »

dps meters are not at all comparable in importancy with these topics, but are inevitable with big population

I couldn't disagree more. Easy-access dps meters will inevitably bring about a toxic game culture hellbent on optimizing the fun out of the game. For proof you need only look to the difference in the WoW and FFIV communities.

There is nothing "inevitable" about large MMOs and some imaginary need to have hard numbers to crunch.

Are you sure? Like sure wow has better addon automatization download process, but ACT for ffxiv is just download and extract. I'd definitely say that the thing to blame is the fact that blizzard was actively shrinking the game master team and ffxiv has very strong antiharassment policy so you get banned pretty quickly if you harass other players for whatever reason.

and "optimizing" the fun out of the game is never really on the dps meters, because it is actually from theorycrafters that are creating gigantic spreadsheets and are looking for strong interactions to create the strongest builds possible

You are simply blaming toxicity on the thing you dislike disregarding any other variables and their importance

Vhaeyne

Wingtzu wrote: »

I couldn't disagree more. Easy-access dps meters will inevitably bring about a toxic game culture hellbent on optimizing the fun out of the game. For proof you need only look to the difference in the WoW and FFIV communities.

FFXIV both has easy access to DPS meters and is toxic AF.

They may not say, "Your DPS sucks, GIT GUD!" to you face in game. The group will however magically vanish and reform without you in it after 2-3 of your bad pulls. That or you will just outright get removed from the party with no explanation.

Installing ACT in FFXIV is as easy as installing any meter in WOW.

It is naive to think that not having the game's official blessing on DPS meters will remove toxicity. People get toxic AF in "Extreme" FFXIV content (content that is designed to be beginner raid content). Realistically, the only cure for toxicity is to have the players know each other well before doing content together.

Anytime players do challenging content with strangers, there will be toxicity after a few failures.

The good news is that Ashes is a very guild-centric game. You will likely never be able to do any high-end content outside a guild group. This means that Ashes will be less toxic of a game inherently. Removing DPS meters is just taking tools away from guilds. That is, if you think Intrepid can prevent DPS meters from existing. Which I am extremely skeptical of myself.

Dygz

Tragnar wrote: »

Then by your own statement all of the most successful games failed, because they didn't meet the design - you literally are taking design goals for something they are not. Design goals in games is the same thing as sketches for artists - you want to have a general idea for the project you are working on, but you still have a lot of leeway to even change the design goals/sketches as you get further into it.

Your logic is absurd.
All games do not have the same design goals.
And by your logic, it's perfectly fine if Ashes is pay to win or ends up with a PvE-Only server.

Tragnar wrote: »

You are completely wrong in this - if anything the last few weeks showed is that players want to have in an mmo a lot of content, that respects their time and investment without bullshit whale exploiting monetization - dps meters are not at all comparable in importancy with these topics, but are inevitable with big population

Yep. Everyone wants Ashes to have lots of content that respects their time investment without whale exploiting monetization.
And we don't need DPS meters to accomplish that.
If DPS meters are inevitable then this thread has no purpose.

Vhaeyne wrote: »

It is naive to think that not having the game's official blessing on DPS meters will remove toxicity. People get toxic AF in "Extreme" FFXIV content (content that is designed to be beginner raid content).

Removing DPS meters is just taking tools away from guilds. That is, if you think Intrepid can prevent DPS meters from existing. Which I am extremely skeptical of myself.

As far as I know, no one has stated that the devs not including DPS meters will remove toxicity.
Ashes devs are not including DPS meters because that will reduce toxicity.
The devs won't be removing DPS meters, rather they won't be implementing DPS meters.
And the devs will be bannin add-ons.
I'm not aware of anyone arguing that DPS meters won't exist.

Child Item