DPS meters are trash and should not be included in a game, it is like saying that is a argument for people to use aim bot in a shooter. There is a reason why everyone is against it and no one wants that trash, I'd rather judge someone with my eyes as a person and help them grow or carry them than have people judging with dps meters. It is toxic in mentality even more so when you are involving groups.
A combat tracker is nothing at all like an aim bot in an FPS game.
A combat tracker is more akin to the match stats screen that shows up after basically every FPS match.
If you want to compare things in an MMO to an aim bot in an FPS, you would be looking at macros, or at combat assistants.
There is indeed a reason some people are against combat trackers. I've been involved in this thread since before it was this thread. The people against combat trackers so far have basically all fit in to three groups; those that misunderstand what combat trackers can and can not do (this seems to be you), those that attribute outcomes incorrectly to combat trackers (usually either the existence of a games meta, or situations where players are booted mid way through content), and people that basically just say "why cant you just follow the rules?".
There has not been a single valid complaint raised against combat trackers in the 3k+ posts in this thread. There are people that say they are against them, but saying you are against something and having a valid reason for being against it are vastly different things.
The community doesn't want it period, if you think everyone isn't valid that is fine everyone has their own bias. The community feels our points are valid and if a tiny group doesn't see eye to eye that is fine. It is clear what people want regardless if you choose to argue with everyone. The forums is only a tiny amount of people into games as well so that number of people that don't want it or don't care for it wold only be even more massaive. And I'm not talking about *2 or *10, forum population of games is much less than 1%.
The bulk of players I know (95%+) run combat trackers because they enjoy them. Assuming you have a history of having played any MMO for any length of time, you are at least ok enough with combat trackers existing that it hasn't caused you to leave a game.
As to your validity comments. Wanting something (or not wanting something) in itself isnt a valid reason.
I cant just say "I want a sandwich" and that being a valid want. If I say "I want a sandwich because I am hungry" I have now given a valid reason for wanting a sandwich. However, if I say "I want a sandwich because helium makes my voice sound funny", then j am in a situation where I still have a want, I just have not given a valid reason for wanting it. I have given a reason, but it is not a valid reason. Not having given a valid reason doesnt alter the fact that I may want a sandwich, but it should influence the decision of whoever's is handing out sandwiches, especially if there are not enough to go around and everyone else is hungry.
So far, no one has given a valid reason as to why guild and family based combat trackers shouldnt exist in Ashes. They have said they dont want them - some people not wanting them isnt a point of debate here. It is their reasoning that is being discussed.
Look back two posts of mine and see where I talked about Steven's decision regarding cosmetics. He made a decision there that I do not like. However, he gave us a solid reason for his decision.
That's all good. Not only am I not going to debate something with solid reasoning behind it - even if the result is not what I would want - but I will then go out and repeat that reasoning so that others understand.
That hasn't happened with trackers. No one, players nor Intrepid staff, have given a valid reason as to why they should not exist - they have just given a number of invalid reasons.
If someone actually had a valid reason as to why they shouldnt exist in Ashes, this thread wouldn't be as long as it is.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
So you literally fucking agree with me. I just want the in-game combat log to give us all the things that we do (or are done to us) and to be able to save that in text form if I ever want to go through it (the same as I would do to a recording of the fight).
Pretty sure the Ashes game design has a personal combat log in the chat window.
Your idea is "Infiltrate, get past that silly ToS... then do what I want!". You start off shady.
While I understand how you would arrive at this conclusion, it isnt quite accurate.
Where I live, software ToS's can only involve discussions about how you use that software directly. Anything removed from that invalidates the entire ToS.
Since I am able to use a combat tracker in association with Ashes without needing to actually be running Ashes at all (and in fact can run my tracker on a computer that doesnt even have Ashes installed), there is literally no legal way I am breaking the ToS - regardless of how it is written.
If you want to say this amounts to infiltrating past the silly ToS, then I guess you can. At best, I would call it malicious compliance. I'll absolutely put my hand up for that one.
So really, if your argument is "if you agree to the terms of service, you should stick to them", then all I can say is that under literally every scenario I have talked about (bar 1 extreme scenario), I have met my legal obligations under those terms - it just so happens that I am not as bound by them as some others may be (living in a place that puts people's rights ahead of company rights is fantastic).
This is why I didnt bother discussing the ToS angel. I'm following the ToS to the level that I am required to follow it, regardless of what the ToS actually ends up saying - simplybecause everything I have talked about falls outside of what a software ToS can prevent me from doing.
Now, going back to the point about good neighbors. Who is the better neighbor here - the person that wants to do an activity they are perfectly entitled to do, but who knows that the activity may upset his neighbors and so attempts to find a means by which said activity wont impact his neighbors, or the neighbor that wants to attempt to make it against the rules for the person to ever do that activity, despite there being no actual legal path to do so?
Given this scenario, I know which of the two I would rather live next door to - clearly the person trying to make it work for both.
Perhaps a better question is, which of these two people would you rather be yourself?
So you will be content to never run Ashes with a combat tracker active. You will close the application of Ashes, then apply your combat tracker. Every time. Scouts honor?
You'll take the extra time of doing it all out of game with Ashes closed. Right? I understand you properly? This is your intention?
I wont need to.
Assuming Intrepid opt to include a provision in the ToS that prevents us running a combat tracker at the same time as the game client (which, to be fair, is untested where I am from), I can just run it on a second computer. The aim is to get it running on a phone.
Again, Intrepid have no scope to limit what I can do on my laptop or phone while playing Ashes on my gaming computer.
I'd still like an answer to the comment about being a good neighbor. Which of the two do you consider to be the good neighbor - the one wanting to participate in an activity they have every right to participate in, bot who knows it will annoy their neighbor and so are trying to find a way to prevent that annoyance, or the neighbor that is trying g to make that activity against the rules, despite there being no grounds for doing so?
Keep in mind, the first neighbor is well within his rights to perform said activity in the most obnoxious, in-your-face manner imaginable, but rather than doing that, is looking to find a better way.
You can use your eyes and judge if someone is using the right skill or not and talk to them in voice chat when to call it out. You don't need a dps meter to be doing that for you you have a voice and fingers.
If we assume the game has a different visual for each ability, at each skill level, and each augment alters the look, we are talking close to 30k different ability visuals.
Now, I doubt any player is going to ever see them all, let alone be able to register exactly which ability one person among 40 is using that is incorrect, while still performing their role in the raid.
If such a situation ever was to happen, then the game has made allowance for too few builds. If you know that I used the wrong ability, then you must assume that there is only one way to play my class.
You cant say there are many ways to play my class and still be able to tell that I used the wrong ability.
I accept your opinion too.
I see no way solving this problem so that everybody who comes to this thread to say "wow, what a great idea".
If you look back through this thread, you will see many people come in, state why they do not like combat trackers, enter in to a brief discussion with me, hear what the suggestion made in the early stages of this thread is, state that it seems to be a good idea, and then not post in this thread at all again.
That idea is the guild tracker.
Guilds can opt to pick a tracker as a guild perk, and that tracker only works on members of the guild in question.
Since players already join guilds that are full of like minded players, this is a natural form of segregation that will exist regardless.
If you then also give that same option at the family level, you cover all bases of people that may want a combat tracker, but you leave everyone that doesn't want their combat tracked absolutely free to play the game that way.
This leaves no fuzzy lines where people running pick up content can ask to see your data, it is a solid, hard line of "I want combat trackers and thus I can use them on my guild/family" and "I do not want combat trackers and therefore, just no".
It leaves players in a way where they have no option at all but to respect the decisions of others.
It also happens to be a solution that those people I know making combat trackers for Ashes would be fine with, they wouldn't release their trackers if that is in the game, as they are making trackers because they know the game will be better for having them, but it will be even better still (all around) if the above exists.
As an idea, the above has a little more nuance to it that was hashed out much earlier in this thread. In fact, Dygz was an early proponent of the idea, and helped shape it. The fact that he is now against combat trackers is simply his reaction to Steven later on saying that he doesn't want them - as up until that point Dygz was fine with the above suggestion.
There is a reason why its only you and teem to time a small handful of others fighting for it. No one else wants DPS meters.
Nah, many people have come in, said they are all for trackers (some with caveats, though they have all been addressed in the guild based tracker solution) and then left. Even more have said they are against them, had that guild based suggesting explained to them and said that sounds fine.
There is no point in them hanging around and joining the argument when the two or three of us that are here and are all for them are doing just fine.
I mean, when you argue logic, you don't need masses of people (not that there are masses against them - only a small handful). Masses of people in an argument are only something you consider a bonus when you are trying to fight against the logical conclusion.
The target audience is decided by the developers (in all games, not only MMOs).
They have the right to do that.
They also do not have to give a logical reason for their choice.
That is an assertive right.
Indeed they have both of those rights.
However, if they do give a reason for something, and we find that reason illogical or invalid, we have the right to point that out.
Intrepid do not need to then alter their stance to that of a more logical one, but then everyone now knows that Intrepid is not developing the game in a logical manner - at least not entirely. They are making decisions about the game they are unable to back up.
I personally consider the fact that this is happening to be far, far worse than not having a combat tracker. I can't see how anyone would be happy that Intrepid considers this to be an acceptable way to develop a game.
Your idea is "Infiltrate, get past that silly ToS... then do what I want!". You start off shady.
While I understand how you would arrive at this conclusion, it isnt quite accurate.
Where I live, software ToS's can only involve discussions about how you use that software directly. Anything removed from that invalidates the entire ToS.
Since I am able to use a combat tracker in association with Ashes without needing to actually be running Ashes at all (and in fact can run my tracker on a computer that doesnt even have Ashes installed), there is literally no legal way I am breaking the ToS - regardless of how it is written.
If you want to say this amounts to infiltrating past the silly ToS, then I guess you can. At best, I would call it malicious compliance. I'll absolutely put my hand up for that one.
So really, if your argument is "if you agree to the terms of service, you should stick to them", then all I can say is that under literally every scenario I have talked about (bar 1 extreme scenario), I have met my legal obligations under those terms - it just so happens that I am not as bound by them as some others may be (living in a place that puts people's rights ahead of company rights is fantastic).
This is why I didnt bother discussing the ToS angel. I'm following the ToS to the level that I am required to follow it, regardless of what the ToS actually ends up saying - simplybecause everything I have talked about falls outside of what a software ToS can prevent me from doing.
Now, going back to the point about good neighbors. Who is the better neighbor here - the person that wants to do an activity they are perfectly entitled to do, but who knows that the activity may upset his neighbors and so attempts to find a means by which said activity wont impact his neighbors, or the neighbor that wants to attempt to make it against the rules for the person to ever do that activity, despite there being no actual legal path to do so?
Given this scenario, I know which of the two I would rather live next door to - clearly the person trying to make it work for both.
Perhaps a better question is, which of these two people would you rather be yourself?
So you will be content to never run Ashes with a combat tracker active. You will close the application of Ashes, then apply your combat tracker. Every time. Scouts honor?
You'll take the extra time of doing it all out of game with Ashes closed. Right? I understand you properly? This is your intention?
I wont need to.
Assuming Intrepid opt to include a provision in the ToS that prevents us running a combat tracker at the same time as the game client (which, to be fair, is untested where I am from), I can just run it on a second computer. The aim is to get it running on a phone.
Again, Intrepid have no scope to limit what I can do on my laptop or phone while playing Ashes on my gaming computer.
I'd still like an answer to the comment about being a good neighbor. Which of the two do you consider to be the good neighbor - the one wanting to participate in an activity they have every right to participate in, bot who knows it will annoy their neighbor and so are trying to find a way to prevent that annoyance, or the neighbor that is trying g to make that activity against the rules, despite there being no grounds for doing so?
Keep in mind, the first neighbor is well within his rights to perform said activity in the most obnoxious, in-your-face manner imaginable, but rather than doing that, is looking to find a better way.
So you understand the spirit of the rule, that they don't want combat trackers used.
But you have a loop hole, so it's all good. You don't care about the spirit of the rule, you have a nice little work around.
So even if Ashes doesn't want Combat Trackers ran in game, stated as such... you don't care because they legally can't stop you.
You are never the good neighbor, no matter how much you want to believe you are, when you don't care about the spirit of the Terms. When you agree to them because you know you have loopholes you can exploit.
The game is based on not using Trackers. You don't like the reasons Steven has given for this. So you don't care about the rule, or the spirit of the game. That's the point, man.
I'm glad you can sit in the corner and say "tee hee, LEGALLY he can't stop me." We already know the intent, it's been expressed. The community is behind the intent. You don't care about that. That's being a bad neighbor.
But you'll never understand and never admit that. So that's cool. I'm done with you. You are going to do what ever you want to do, regardless of what the ToS or stated objectives by Intrepid are. That's just who you chose to be.
That makes you a bad neighbor. Period. I'm not changing to meet you half way to be a good neighbor, because you don't care about the spirit of the game that Steven has put forth.
Your idea is "Infiltrate, get past that silly ToS... then do what I want!". You start off shady.
While I understand how you would arrive at this conclusion, it isnt quite accurate.
Where I live, software ToS's can only involve discussions about how you use that software directly. Anything removed from that invalidates the entire ToS.
Since I am able to use a combat tracker in association with Ashes without needing to actually be running Ashes at all (and in fact can run my tracker on a computer that doesnt even have Ashes installed), there is literally no legal way I am breaking the ToS - regardless of how it is written.
If you want to say this amounts to infiltrating past the silly ToS, then I guess you can. At best, I would call it malicious compliance. I'll absolutely put my hand up for that one.
So really, if your argument is "if you agree to the terms of service, you should stick to them", then all I can say is that under literally every scenario I have talked about (bar 1 extreme scenario), I have met my legal obligations under those terms - it just so happens that I am not as bound by them as some others may be (living in a place that puts people's rights ahead of company rights is fantastic).
This is why I didnt bother discussing the ToS angel. I'm following the ToS to the level that I am required to follow it, regardless of what the ToS actually ends up saying - simplybecause everything I have talked about falls outside of what a software ToS can prevent me from doing.
Now, going back to the point about good neighbors. Who is the better neighbor here - the person that wants to do an activity they are perfectly entitled to do, but who knows that the activity may upset his neighbors and so attempts to find a means by which said activity wont impact his neighbors, or the neighbor that wants to attempt to make it against the rules for the person to ever do that activity, despite there being no actual legal path to do so?
Given this scenario, I know which of the two I would rather live next door to - clearly the person trying to make it work for both.
Perhaps a better question is, which of these two people would you rather be yourself?
So you will be content to never run Ashes with a combat tracker active. You will close the application of Ashes, then apply your combat tracker. Every time. Scouts honor?
You'll take the extra time of doing it all out of game with Ashes closed. Right? I understand you properly? This is your intention?
I wont need to.
Assuming Intrepid opt to include a provision in the ToS that prevents us running a combat tracker at the same time as the game client (which, to be fair, is untested where I am from), I can just run it on a second computer. The aim is to get it running on a phone.
Again, Intrepid have no scope to limit what I can do on my laptop or phone while playing Ashes on my gaming computer.
I'd still like an answer to the comment about being a good neighbor. Which of the two do you consider to be the good neighbor - the one wanting to participate in an activity they have every right to participate in, bot who knows it will annoy their neighbor and so are trying to find a way to prevent that annoyance, or the neighbor that is trying g to make that activity against the rules, despite there being no grounds for doing so?
Keep in mind, the first neighbor is well within his rights to perform said activity in the most obnoxious, in-your-face manner imaginable, but rather than doing that, is looking to find a better way.
So you understand the spirit of the rule, that they don't want combat trackers used.
But you have a loop hole, so it's all good. You don't care about the spirit of the rule, you have a nice little work around.
So even if Ashes doesn't want Combat Trackers ran in game, stated as such... you don't care because they legally can't stop you.
You are never the good neighbor, no matter how much you want to believe you are, when you don't care about the spirit of the Terms. When you agree to them because you know you have loopholes you can exploit.
The game is based on not using Trackers. You don't like the reasons Steven has given for this. So you don't care about the rule, or the spirit of the game. That's the point, man.
I'm glad you can sit in the corner and say "tee hee, LEGALLY he can't stop me." We already know the intent, it's been expressed. The community is behind the intent. You don't care about that. That's being a bad neighbor.
But you'll never understand and never admit that. So that's cool. I'm done with you. You are going to do what ever you want to do, regardless of what the ToS or stated objectives by Intrepid are. That's just who you chose to be.
That makes you a bad neighbor. Period. I'm not changing to meet you half way to be a good neighbor, because you don't care about the spirit of the game that Steven has put forth.
Its why they need to lean more on the action combat side of things which will make those types of tools less and less important as it will be more about people that can land their hits and such.
That makes you a bad neighbor. Period. I'm not changing to meet you half way to be a good neighbor, because you don't care about the spirit of the game that Steven has put forth.
Perhaps this is where we disagree.
You seem to think that Intrepid are able to dictate my rights to me. That is an odd stance to take, as they clearly are not. Your stance would make more sense (perhaps) if I were obliged in any way to follow everything Intrepid say. You may be in a part of the world where you are required to do this (I don't know, nor care), and if that is the case I can understand your position (you am obliged to do as they say, therefore everyone should be obliged to do as they say).
However, that isn't the case. Different parts of the world have different laws, and those living in those parts of the world only need to follow their local laws. Fun fact, even if the ToS says any arbitration needs to take part in a specific location, if the ToS is agreed to where I am from (even if just flying over), then that clause is invalid.
If you start from the perspective of Intrepid not being able to dictate my rights to me, and work back from there, what we have is the following;
I want to do an activity I am perfectly allowed to do. There are no controls at all on my participating in this activity.
However, I know this activity will annoy some people a little, and so I am suggesting we find some controls that I can opt in to, in order to make me participating in this activity less annoying to those that would be annoyed by it. I do not have to do this, as there are no controls at all on that activity so I can participate in it at will, as much as I like, when ever I like. I am simply doing this for no reason other than to annoy those people less - even though it means giving up a small amount of my freedom.
Rather than saying sure, lets work out a way to make that happen, you are saying no, this irrelevant body over there says you shouldn't do that activity, and so I think you shouldn't do it at all.
You are then accusing me of being the bad neighbor, despite me being the one trying to find the best solution, and you being the one saying I shouldn't do the thing I am perfectly allowed to do.
I find this to be an odd stance. To me, the good neighbor is the one willing to work out a compromise that best suits everyone, rather than the one saying "no, do it my way, and that is the end of the discussion". To me, that person is literally the definition of the bad neighbor.
What you are essentially saying is that I should throw away my Democratic Rights, because Intrepid said so. Worse, you are saying that me opting to not throw away said rights is somehow a loophole, rather than being the obvious way it should be.
Your idea is "Infiltrate, get past that silly ToS... then do what I want!". You start off shady.
While I understand how you would arrive at this conclusion, it isnt quite accurate.
Where I live, software ToS's can only involve discussions about how you use that software directly. Anything removed from that invalidates the entire ToS.
Since I am able to use a combat tracker in association with Ashes without needing to actually be running Ashes at all (and in fact can run my tracker on a computer that doesnt even have Ashes installed), there is literally no legal way I am breaking the ToS - regardless of how it is written.
If you want to say this amounts to infiltrating past the silly ToS, then I guess you can. At best, I would call it malicious compliance. I'll absolutely put my hand up for that one.
So really, if your argument is "if you agree to the terms of service, you should stick to them", then all I can say is that under literally every scenario I have talked about (bar 1 extreme scenario), I have met my legal obligations under those terms - it just so happens that I am not as bound by them as some others may be (living in a place that puts people's rights ahead of company rights is fantastic).
This is why I didnt bother discussing the ToS angel. I'm following the ToS to the level that I am required to follow it, regardless of what the ToS actually ends up saying - simplybecause everything I have talked about falls outside of what a software ToS can prevent me from doing.
Now, going back to the point about good neighbors. Who is the better neighbor here - the person that wants to do an activity they are perfectly entitled to do, but who knows that the activity may upset his neighbors and so attempts to find a means by which said activity wont impact his neighbors, or the neighbor that wants to attempt to make it against the rules for the person to ever do that activity, despite there being no actual legal path to do so?
Given this scenario, I know which of the two I would rather live next door to - clearly the person trying to make it work for both.
Perhaps a better question is, which of these two people would you rather be yourself?
So you will be content to never run Ashes with a combat tracker active. You will close the application of Ashes, then apply your combat tracker. Every time. Scouts honor?
You'll take the extra time of doing it all out of game with Ashes closed. Right? I understand you properly? This is your intention?
I wont need to.
Assuming Intrepid opt to include a provision in the ToS that prevents us running a combat tracker at the same time as the game client (which, to be fair, is untested where I am from), I can just run it on a second computer. The aim is to get it running on a phone.
Again, Intrepid have no scope to limit what I can do on my laptop or phone while playing Ashes on my gaming computer.
I'd still like an answer to the comment about being a good neighbor. Which of the two do you consider to be the good neighbor - the one wanting to participate in an activity they have every right to participate in, bot who knows it will annoy their neighbor and so are trying to find a way to prevent that annoyance, or the neighbor that is trying g to make that activity against the rules, despite there being no grounds for doing so?
Keep in mind, the first neighbor is well within his rights to perform said activity in the most obnoxious, in-your-face manner imaginable, but rather than doing that, is looking to find a better way.
So you understand the spirit of the rule, that they don't want combat trackers used.
But you have a loop hole, so it's all good. You don't care about the spirit of the rule, you have a nice little work around.
So even if Ashes doesn't want Combat Trackers ran in game, stated as such... you don't care because they legally can't stop you.
You are never the good neighbor, no matter how much you want to believe you are, when you don't care about the spirit of the Terms. When you agree to them because you know you have loopholes you can exploit.
The game is based on not using Trackers. You don't like the reasons Steven has given for this. So you don't care about the rule, or the spirit of the game. That's the point, man.
I'm glad you can sit in the corner and say "tee hee, LEGALLY he can't stop me." We already know the intent, it's been expressed. The community is behind the intent. You don't care about that. That's being a bad neighbor.
But you'll never understand and never admit that. So that's cool. I'm done with you. You are going to do what ever you want to do, regardless of what the ToS or stated objectives by Intrepid are. That's just who you chose to be.
That makes you a bad neighbor. Period. I'm not changing to meet you half way to be a good neighbor, because you don't care about the spirit of the game that Steven has put forth.
Its why they need to lean more on the action combat side of things which will make those types of tools less and less important as it will be more about people that can land their hits and such.
Indeed action combat will lower the value of a combat tracker. It won't totally eliminate it though, I mean, trackers are used in Planetside, an MMOFPS.
The logic is like in any other game.
- when you cannot satisfy opposite audiences, you have to choose one.
- they might see a risk for the game dynamic, if the players who use trackers will be in the game.
Risk = things which are unknown. Here the wiki quote:
"The developers believe that parsers (DPS meters) can have negative effects"
Everybody sees risks differently and drives his busyness according to them. Is that not a good enough argument for you?
- another reason is that they try to influence the players, to play differently. They want to slow players down, to not rush to and through such content: no teleporters, no group finder, not trackers ( mentioned that before )
- another quote from wiki "The goal is to mitigate and make the practice less prevalent through the ease that DPS meters provide."
The problem with your position here is that it relies on the assumption that Intrepid believes players will not use combat trackers in Ashes.
However, we all know that they will exist, and many players will use them.
So, according to you, they are developing the game based on the idea that combat trackers will not be a thing, when they will absolutely be a thing.
This is why it is an illogical decision.
As to your argument about slowing players down, the way content is tied in to node progression does that just fine. Combat trackers are not going to speed that up at all. A fictional lack of them wouldn't slow that down at all either.
You see? This is your problem. Lack of seeing how others can enjoy the game.
They don't make the game for you.
And yet, of the two of us, when it comes to combat trackers, I am the one that will get my way.
FFXIV is the best example of an MMO that has a similar stance to trackers as Intrepid currently have. Combat trackers are very prevalent in that game. If you want a game where other people can not track you in combat, Ashes current stance simply will not allow for that.
So perhaps it is you that the game isn't being made for? I'm not willing to say. All I am willing to say is that I will have a combat tracker, and the way things are looking I will be able to track your combat - potentially even if we are on different servers.
I assume you would like that to not be the case, correct?
That makes you a bad neighbor. Period. I'm not changing to meet you half way to be a good neighbor, because you don't care about the spirit of the game that Steven has put forth.
Perhaps this is where we disagree.
You seem to think that Intrepid are able to dictate my rights to me. That is an odd stance to take, as they clearly are not. Your stance would make more sense (perhaps) if I were obliged in any way to follow everything Intrepid say. You may be in a part of the world where you are required to do this (I don't know, nor care), and if that is the case I can understand your position (you am obliged to do as they say, therefore everyone should be obliged to do as they say).
However, that isn't the case. Different parts of the world have different laws, and those living in those parts of the world only need to follow their local laws. Fun fact, even if the ToS says any arbitration needs to take part in a specific location, if the ToS is agreed to where I am from (even if just flying over), then that clause is invalid.
If you start from the perspective of Intrepid not being able to dictate my rights to me, and work back from there, what we have is the following;
I want to do an activity I am perfectly allowed to do. There are no controls at all on my participating in this activity.
However, I know this activity will annoy some people a little, and so I am suggesting we find some controls that I can opt in to, in order to make me participating in this activity less annoying to those that would be annoyed by it. I do not have to do this, as there are no controls at all on that activity so I can participate in it at will, as much as I like, when ever I like. I am simply doing this for no reason other than to annoy those people less - even though it means giving up a small amount of my freedom.
Rather than saying sure, lets work out a way to make that happen, you are saying no, this irrelevant body over there says you shouldn't do that activity, and so I think you shouldn't do it at all.
You are then accusing me of being the bad neighbor, despite me being the one trying to find the best solution, and you being the one saying I shouldn't do the thing I am perfectly allowed to do.
I find this to be an odd stance. To me, the good neighbor is the one willing to work out a compromise that best suits everyone, rather than the one saying "no, do it my way, and that is the end of the discussion". To me, that person is literally the definition of the bad neighbor.
What you are essentially saying is that I should throw away my Democratic Rights, because Intrepid said so. Worse, you are saying that me opting to not throw away said rights is somehow a loophole, rather than being the obvious way it should be.
I never said they can dictate their rights to you.
I said they have expressed they don't want people to use Combat Trackers. That's their statement. But because they can't actually stop you, you don't care about their intent, so you're going to do it anyways.
That's what I said.
So you understand what they are trying to do. You are not going to go along with it, because it's within your rights not to.
That's bad faith, that's bad neighbor. It's legal. It's your right to do so. Doesn't make it good.
That makes you a bad neighbor. Period. I'm not changing to meet you half way to be a good neighbor, because you don't care about the spirit of the game that Steven has put forth.
Perhaps this is where we disagree.
You seem to think that Intrepid are able to dictate my rights to me. That is an odd stance to take, as they clearly are not. Your stance would make more sense (perhaps) if I were obliged in any way to follow everything Intrepid say. You may be in a part of the world where you are required to do this (I don't know, nor care), and if that is the case I can understand your position (you am obliged to do as they say, therefore everyone should be obliged to do as they say).
However, that isn't the case. Different parts of the world have different laws, and those living in those parts of the world only need to follow their local laws. Fun fact, even if the ToS says any arbitration needs to take part in a specific location, if the ToS is agreed to where I am from (even if just flying over), then that clause is invalid.
If you start from the perspective of Intrepid not being able to dictate my rights to me, and work back from there, what we have is the following;
I want to do an activity I am perfectly allowed to do. There are no controls at all on my participating in this activity.
However, I know this activity will annoy some people a little, and so I am suggesting we find some controls that I can opt in to, in order to make me participating in this activity less annoying to those that would be annoyed by it. I do not have to do this, as there are no controls at all on that activity so I can participate in it at will, as much as I like, when ever I like. I am simply doing this for no reason other than to annoy those people less - even though it means giving up a small amount of my freedom.
Rather than saying sure, lets work out a way to make that happen, you are saying no, this irrelevant body over there says you shouldn't do that activity, and so I think you shouldn't do it at all.
You are then accusing me of being the bad neighbor, despite me being the one trying to find the best solution, and you being the one saying I shouldn't do the thing I am perfectly allowed to do.
I find this to be an odd stance. To me, the good neighbor is the one willing to work out a compromise that best suits everyone, rather than the one saying "no, do it my way, and that is the end of the discussion". To me, that person is literally the definition of the bad neighbor.
What you are essentially saying is that I should throw away my Democratic Rights, because Intrepid said so. Worse, you are saying that me opting to not throw away said rights is somehow a loophole, rather than being the obvious way it should be.
The problem is this.
It's never once crossed your mind that the best stance to take might be playing the game the way the developers intend it to be played.
There would be no compromise needed. We'd play in good faith.
But this is unacceptable to you. So even knowing their intent, you're not going to follow it. That's not 'compromise'.
There is a Good Neighbor avenue to be taken here. It's respecting the Developers and playing the game the way they are trying to set it up to be played... which is without combat trackers.
You absolutely refuse that. But some how think you're acting in good faith. That's the issue.
I know, I get it. You're the good guy. You're the hero here, fighting for the 'best solution'. Ever stop to think no one ever goes in thinking their the bad guy? Ever stop to think that by completely disregarding the intent of the Developer that YOU are starting off on the wrong foot?
Of course not. Because this is only an MMO. Obviously you are much bigger than it, what you want matters much more than what the Developers want. If only the Developers would meet YOU halfway, after you completely reject their intention.
It's never once crossed your mind that the best stance to take might be playing the game the way the developers intend it to be played.
People shouldn't have go out of their way to use a product how it is designed, a product should be designed with how people will use it in mind.
If you create an MMORPG, people are going to use combat trackers. As such, create your MMORPG with that in mind.
There is a Good Neighbor avenue to be taken here. It's respecting the Developers and playing the game the way they are trying to set it up to be played... which is without combat trackers.
You absolutely refuse that.
Yeah, I am all for a compromise of some sort, as should be obvious.
What you are talking about here though, that isn't a compromise (I don't think that word means what you think it means).
What you are talking about here is capitulation, not compromise. You want everyone to just do what you want, without compromise at all.
Ever stop to think that by completely disregarding the intent of the Developer that YOU are starting off on the wrong foot?
Nope.
I started out in this thread stating that myself and many others will use trackers in Ashes. This was before Intrepid made their stance on them public.
When they decided that they were not keen on trackers, they already knew that people would use them, and that there was nothing they could do to stop it. They knew that the best they could hope for was something similar to FFXIV, yet they decided to be against them anyway.
How can you then claim that is me that started off on the wrong foot and not Intrepid?
It's never once crossed your mind that the best stance to take might be playing the game the way the developers intend it to be played.
People shouldn't have go out of their way to use a product how it is designed, a product should be designed with how people will use it in mind.
If you create an MMORPG, people are going to use combat trackers. As such, create your MMORPG with that in mind.
There is a Good Neighbor avenue to be taken here. It's respecting the Developers and playing the game the way they are trying to set it up to be played... which is without combat trackers.
You absolutely refuse that.
Yeah, I am all for a compromise of some sort, as should be obvious.
What you are talking about here though, that isn't a compromise (I don't think that word means what you think it means).
What you are talking about here is capitulation, not compromise. You want everyone to just do what you want, without compromise at all.
Ever stop to think that by completely disregarding the intent of the Developer that YOU are starting off on the wrong foot?
Nope.
I started out in this thread stating that myself and many others will use trackers in Ashes. This was before Intrepid made their stance on them public.
When they decided that they were not keen on trackers, they already knew that people would use them, and that there was nothing they could do to stop it. They knew that the best they could hope for was something similar to FFXIV, yet they decided to be against them anyway.
How can you then claim that is me that started off on the wrong foot and not Intrepid?
How? Easy.
They've stated that don't want them used. That's the intent and idea of the game, to go back before Trackers and not use them.
You say "F that, I do what I want'. There are PLENTY of games that employ trackers, go play them then.
Instead you are intentionally violating the spirit of the game. That's your stance.
They've stated that don't want them used. That's the intent and idea of the game, to go back before Trackers and not use them.
Yeah, but they only stated that after consideration of the discussion in which they were told that they will be used regardless of what decision they go with.
I didn't say "fuck what you say, I'm using them anyway". What happened is I said I was going to use them, along with many other players and they said "fuck that, we don't want you to" (or actually, they said "we don't support that").
You seem to have the order of events backwards here.
Intrepids decision on this matter was made while knowing people - myself included - will use them anyway.
I'm curious as to why you think they are against the spirit of the game - this isn't a statement Steven has made.
There is a reason why its only you and teem to time a small handful of others fighting for it. No one else wants DPS meters.
Not true I really like them (mainly in endgame content) and everyone I've ever played with agrees with this. I choose not to post here because Noaani is doing a great job advocating why they are wanted, aren't the root-cause of toxicity and also comes up with solutions.
I like the concept the game Lost Ark has. Not allowing dps meters but in the end of the dungeon showing the biggest contributers to the dungeon. I would suggest having something like "most damage done ", "most healing done" and maybe "most damage mitigated".
For people who still want to min-max their dmg and want to have a proper comparison they have a training area in which you can fight a scarecrow to figure out your dps. You can also tweak all the stats and skills to your liking in that area which is great for experimenting different kind of builds and skill rotations.
I like that concept way more than just having a normal dps meter. In games that had a dps meter it always got toxic at some point when you didn't do as much dmg as everyone else.
In Lost Ark on the other hand it didn't experience people getting toxic because of low damage.
In games that had a dps meter it always got toxic at some point when you didn't do as much dmg as everyone else.
In Lost Ark on the other hand it didn't experience people getting toxic because of low damage.
It didnt always get toxic, that is limited to a very few games.
A number of games had both heavy combat tracker use, and very low toxicity levels. There is no direct connection between the two.
Please no DPS meter. It breaks immersion in my opinion. If it is an optional personal thing it is fine I guess, but don't make other people able to see each other's dps/hps output, because it will take away focus from the game itself and make it a war of numbers which would be a shame.
Please no DPS meter. It breaks immersion in my opinion. If it is an optional personal thing it is fine I guess, but don't make other people able to see each other's dps/hps output, because it will take away focus from the game itself and make it a war of numbers which would be a shame.
I agree it shouldnt be something that people feel the need to have on screen at all during content. This is something I have always considered a misuse of combat trackers.
My question is, would it concern you at all if I had one that I could use with my guild, but if you and I were in a group (assuming you are not in my guild), I am unable to see anything you are doing?
0
Options
ScootsMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
There is a reason why its only you and teem to time a small handful of others fighting for it. No one else wants DPS meters.
Not true I really like them (mainly in endgame content) and everyone I've ever played with agrees with this. I choose not to post here because Noaani is doing a great job advocating why they are wanted, aren't the root-cause of toxicity and also comes up with solutions.
Yep, we're here. I've always valued them. I like data. I like min maxing gear etc. I like all that. I would argue that it brings more depth to a game too. Min/maxing combat gives players something else to do while in game when they're tired of farming or raiding or whatever. I'd also argue that they can help players get better at their given role(s). Obviously some people don't like them for various reasons. One of which is people worry they won't be invited to do things because they can't hit a certain number on the meter. I would say to those people, you're in the wrong guild or hanging with the wrong people. Just find a group that is more welcoming and more your style. Willing to help you get better. With or without meters, certain groups will still demand higher skill from their group members and they will still figure out ways to judge if an individual is pulling their weight or not. More importantly, with or without meters, there will always be jerks.
It's not worth arguing over though. Steven and the gang have stated they prefer not to have them, so that's that. I'm sure it will still be fun.
There is a reason why its only you and teem to time a small handful of others fighting for it. No one else wants DPS meters.
Not true I really like them (mainly in endgame content) and everyone I've ever played with agrees with this. I choose not to post here because Noaani is doing a great job advocating why they are wanted, aren't the root-cause of toxicity and also comes up with solutions.
Very true actually the post says it all with everyone's view points against it and one person commenting on every post trying to convince them its not. No one wants it except a extremely tiny group of players.
You don't need a DPS meter to min max, you can learn the game and test things outs without it.
In Lost Ark on the other hand it didn't experience people getting toxic because of low damage.
Again, the problem is not combat tracker or not, but how the whole game is designed...
Most activities in Pick Up are the abyssals dungeons, and Guardians...
For abyssal dungeons, just look at all those party asking 1000+ ilvl for the feiton one... (of not 1300+)
And they try to get one 1300+ for each team... sure with such team that can easily kill alaric with half team being useless, no need of toxicity...
For guardians ? one bad sometime just makes the 2 kills slightly longer, and it is if you go party finder, if directly matchmaking you can hope to have only one dude that slows you... then bye... You can't kick during fight, and flaming for flaming is useless. so you accept situation,
Now for raids, how they are makes it people to avoid kicking dude even if they are bad, and prefer to adapt team, or explain again and again... Argos for example, hardest part is second fight, in particular the second mini boss. When there are problematic people, leader just try to re-arrange teams to have enough good people on second miniboss, while keeping enough efficiency for first. (just enough to deal boss) and spamming, again and again "use destro/tornado"
And if wipes come for last fight at this point, people prefer run as seven that leaving.
Because in both, time to find another one, redo first fight, with risk to still have problem is high...
and legion raids, even more in hard mode are less pick up (so toxicity is not a deal there)
The problem is not toxicity against bad people or not (we can see them really fast in a game with really limited heal... and with only 8 people at most, easy to know who is not using bomb/nade) but because how the game is designed, you prefer to go with this deadweight most of time.
And for running argos from day 1, learning people strategies (experienced with RU version) i can say that yes... there are really underperforming people and the whole team knew who without anyone saying it...
They've stated that don't want them used. That's the intent and idea of the game, to go back before Trackers and not use them.
Yeah, but they only stated that after consideration of the discussion in which they were told that they will be used regardless of what decision they go with.
I didn't say "fuck what you say, I'm using them anyway". What happened is I said I was going to use them, along with many other players and they said "fuck that, we don't want you to" (or actually, they said "we don't support that").
You seem to have the order of events backwards here.
Intrepids decision on this matter was made while knowing people - myself included - will use them anyway.
I'm curious as to why you think they are against the spirit of the game - this isn't a statement Steven has made.
The Devs aren't here to negotiate with you. You even say they put out feelers to get a sense of what the community wanted, and AFTER THAT said "We are going with No Trackers". That means that got the info from the COMMUNITY, and from that likely saw THE COMMUNITY at large didn't want them.
Your side lost, right then and there. Community spoke, Devs listened.
Now, you don't like that you lost. But you really didn't, since they can't legally stop you. So, you're going to do it anyways.
Also, think about that... "Regardless of what Intrepid decides, screw them... we're using them anyways" BEFORE they ever announced it they would allow them or not. That's rather hostile, and rather disrespectful.
And yet here you sit still thinking you're the good guy in all this.
From you own words, they hadn't made a decision. You made it clear their decision didn't matter, because you wouldn't be held to any such rules. Yep, really sounds like Good Neighbor there. Nice negotiation.
So then they get feedback from the Community, and come back with "No Trackers, we're going back with that old school feel". Now, as far as we know, they did this because of the Community Feedback. If this is true, not only are you being an ass to Intrepid, but ALSO to the Community.
Because your demand wasn't met, you didn't like the ruling, and you were never going to follow the ruling anyways.
You aren't making the game. You are not the entire Community. From what you've stated, they put out the feelers, they asked what the Community thought, and their response was 'No Tracker'.
So you seem to believe they ignored the Community. You have evidence of that? Show me the data. Ever stop to consider they listened, and the numbers were in the favor of those that didn't want Trackers? Thus they honored the Community, and you crap all over it and Intrepid because you simply won't play by those rules.
So good, if you don't play by the rules though... you probably shouldn't play at all. That's the Bad Neighbor part in all of this. You have no respect for Intrepid or the Community. But in your mind you're the vigilant Knight defending the Community from the Tyrant Steven that didn't listen to you the first time when you fairly warned him that no matter what Intrepid decided, you were using Trackers regardless.
Every way you've tried to spin and defend this, you come out looking like the bad guy. None of the explaining to make it look better, made it look better.
From you own words, they asked. Community responded. From there you feel Community wasn't heard, Steven just chucked the voices out the window. He crapped all over them, and now we're here. That's your version of things.
The problem comes with us having plenty of people here expressing they don't want them, and very few saying they do. If that happened when Steven asked, then he DID listen to the Community, and that's how we got the decision.
If the ToS says No Trackers, I do hope you just simply get banned. I don't want people that will agree to a ToS they won't honor, just because they have a loop hole. That's as real as I can be about it. This is the literal thing that makes you the Bad Neighbor.
Now, on your way Valiant Knight, Savior of Ashes, Never Of Wrong.
@TheClimbTo1 - This entire situation could be summed up by the following meme-y simile.
Invader: threatens war if neighboring kingdom doesn't cede its lands to him.
Kingdom: doesn't cede its lands and announces that they're willing to go to war to protect their lands.
Invader: "See? I'm the good guy. They should have just let me have the lands, since everyone was going to invade them anyway. Now they're just being combative and mean to everyone. They don't understand our needs."
2077 Players arguing they need their AI meter to tell them what skills to use and when and give them information. Since there is so much going on in the game and they aren't skilled or knowledge able to keep up with their own brain, so they need AI to do things for them.
People out here trying to defends DPS meters "The meter isn't toxic people are toxic."
( -____-) Yes people are toxic
The game is too hard we need dps meters ~Dark soul players~ My disappointment is immeasurable.
Intrepid listening to feedback on no dps meters and everyone cheers.
People wanting DPS meters regardless of community feedback
Please no DPS meter. It breaks immersion in my opinion. If it is an optional personal thing it is fine I guess, but don't make other people able to see each other's dps/hps output, because it will take away focus from the game itself and make it a war of numbers which would be a shame.
I agree it shouldnt be something that people feel the need to have on screen at all during content. This is something I have always considered a misuse of combat trackers.
My question is, would it concern you at all if I had one that I could use with my guild, but if you and I were in a group (assuming you are not in my guild), I am unable to see anything you are doing?
Not at all. I would like that actually. I would use it while I play with my friends as well, I would just hate it if in a group with "randoms" everyone can see each others dps/hps and then everything becomes about who does or does not do enough dps/hps.
But then the problem is when one can activate/deactivate showing their stats to the group, the ones who refuse to do it will get kicked from partys you know? so I don't think there can be a middle ground so better not include it unless I am missing something.
Comments
The bulk of players I know (95%+) run combat trackers because they enjoy them. Assuming you have a history of having played any MMO for any length of time, you are at least ok enough with combat trackers existing that it hasn't caused you to leave a game.
As to your validity comments. Wanting something (or not wanting something) in itself isnt a valid reason.
I cant just say "I want a sandwich" and that being a valid want. If I say "I want a sandwich because I am hungry" I have now given a valid reason for wanting a sandwich. However, if I say "I want a sandwich because helium makes my voice sound funny", then j am in a situation where I still have a want, I just have not given a valid reason for wanting it. I have given a reason, but it is not a valid reason. Not having given a valid reason doesnt alter the fact that I may want a sandwich, but it should influence the decision of whoever's is handing out sandwiches, especially if there are not enough to go around and everyone else is hungry.
So far, no one has given a valid reason as to why guild and family based combat trackers shouldnt exist in Ashes. They have said they dont want them - some people not wanting them isnt a point of debate here. It is their reasoning that is being discussed.
Look back two posts of mine and see where I talked about Steven's decision regarding cosmetics. He made a decision there that I do not like. However, he gave us a solid reason for his decision.
That's all good. Not only am I not going to debate something with solid reasoning behind it - even if the result is not what I would want - but I will then go out and repeat that reasoning so that others understand.
That hasn't happened with trackers. No one, players nor Intrepid staff, have given a valid reason as to why they should not exist - they have just given a number of invalid reasons.
If someone actually had a valid reason as to why they shouldnt exist in Ashes, this thread wouldn't be as long as it is.
I wont need to.
Assuming Intrepid opt to include a provision in the ToS that prevents us running a combat tracker at the same time as the game client (which, to be fair, is untested where I am from), I can just run it on a second computer. The aim is to get it running on a phone.
Again, Intrepid have no scope to limit what I can do on my laptop or phone while playing Ashes on my gaming computer.
I'd still like an answer to the comment about being a good neighbor. Which of the two do you consider to be the good neighbor - the one wanting to participate in an activity they have every right to participate in, bot who knows it will annoy their neighbor and so are trying to find a way to prevent that annoyance, or the neighbor that is trying g to make that activity against the rules, despite there being no grounds for doing so?
Keep in mind, the first neighbor is well within his rights to perform said activity in the most obnoxious, in-your-face manner imaginable, but rather than doing that, is looking to find a better way.
Now, I doubt any player is going to ever see them all, let alone be able to register exactly which ability one person among 40 is using that is incorrect, while still performing their role in the raid.
If such a situation ever was to happen, then the game has made allowance for too few builds. If you know that I used the wrong ability, then you must assume that there is only one way to play my class.
You cant say there are many ways to play my class and still be able to tell that I used the wrong ability.
That idea is the guild tracker.
Guilds can opt to pick a tracker as a guild perk, and that tracker only works on members of the guild in question.
Since players already join guilds that are full of like minded players, this is a natural form of segregation that will exist regardless.
If you then also give that same option at the family level, you cover all bases of people that may want a combat tracker, but you leave everyone that doesn't want their combat tracked absolutely free to play the game that way.
This leaves no fuzzy lines where people running pick up content can ask to see your data, it is a solid, hard line of "I want combat trackers and thus I can use them on my guild/family" and "I do not want combat trackers and therefore, just no".
It leaves players in a way where they have no option at all but to respect the decisions of others.
It also happens to be a solution that those people I know making combat trackers for Ashes would be fine with, they wouldn't release their trackers if that is in the game, as they are making trackers because they know the game will be better for having them, but it will be even better still (all around) if the above exists.
As an idea, the above has a little more nuance to it that was hashed out much earlier in this thread. In fact, Dygz was an early proponent of the idea, and helped shape it. The fact that he is now against combat trackers is simply his reaction to Steven later on saying that he doesn't want them - as up until that point Dygz was fine with the above suggestion.
Nah, many people have come in, said they are all for trackers (some with caveats, though they have all been addressed in the guild based tracker solution) and then left. Even more have said they are against them, had that guild based suggesting explained to them and said that sounds fine.
There is no point in them hanging around and joining the argument when the two or three of us that are here and are all for them are doing just fine.
I mean, when you argue logic, you don't need masses of people (not that there are masses against them - only a small handful). Masses of people in an argument are only something you consider a bonus when you are trying to fight against the logical conclusion.
However, if they do give a reason for something, and we find that reason illogical or invalid, we have the right to point that out.
Intrepid do not need to then alter their stance to that of a more logical one, but then everyone now knows that Intrepid is not developing the game in a logical manner - at least not entirely. They are making decisions about the game they are unable to back up.
I personally consider the fact that this is happening to be far, far worse than not having a combat tracker. I can't see how anyone would be happy that Intrepid considers this to be an acceptable way to develop a game.
So you understand the spirit of the rule, that they don't want combat trackers used.
But you have a loop hole, so it's all good. You don't care about the spirit of the rule, you have a nice little work around.
So even if Ashes doesn't want Combat Trackers ran in game, stated as such... you don't care because they legally can't stop you.
You are never the good neighbor, no matter how much you want to believe you are, when you don't care about the spirit of the Terms. When you agree to them because you know you have loopholes you can exploit.
The game is based on not using Trackers. You don't like the reasons Steven has given for this. So you don't care about the rule, or the spirit of the game. That's the point, man.
I'm glad you can sit in the corner and say "tee hee, LEGALLY he can't stop me." We already know the intent, it's been expressed. The community is behind the intent. You don't care about that. That's being a bad neighbor.
But you'll never understand and never admit that. So that's cool. I'm done with you. You are going to do what ever you want to do, regardless of what the ToS or stated objectives by Intrepid are. That's just who you chose to be.
That makes you a bad neighbor. Period. I'm not changing to meet you half way to be a good neighbor, because you don't care about the spirit of the game that Steven has put forth.
Its why they need to lean more on the action combat side of things which will make those types of tools less and less important as it will be more about people that can land their hits and such.
Perhaps this is where we disagree.
You seem to think that Intrepid are able to dictate my rights to me. That is an odd stance to take, as they clearly are not. Your stance would make more sense (perhaps) if I were obliged in any way to follow everything Intrepid say. You may be in a part of the world where you are required to do this (I don't know, nor care), and if that is the case I can understand your position (you am obliged to do as they say, therefore everyone should be obliged to do as they say).
However, that isn't the case. Different parts of the world have different laws, and those living in those parts of the world only need to follow their local laws. Fun fact, even if the ToS says any arbitration needs to take part in a specific location, if the ToS is agreed to where I am from (even if just flying over), then that clause is invalid.
If you start from the perspective of Intrepid not being able to dictate my rights to me, and work back from there, what we have is the following;
I want to do an activity I am perfectly allowed to do. There are no controls at all on my participating in this activity.
However, I know this activity will annoy some people a little, and so I am suggesting we find some controls that I can opt in to, in order to make me participating in this activity less annoying to those that would be annoyed by it. I do not have to do this, as there are no controls at all on that activity so I can participate in it at will, as much as I like, when ever I like. I am simply doing this for no reason other than to annoy those people less - even though it means giving up a small amount of my freedom.
Rather than saying sure, lets work out a way to make that happen, you are saying no, this irrelevant body over there says you shouldn't do that activity, and so I think you shouldn't do it at all.
You are then accusing me of being the bad neighbor, despite me being the one trying to find the best solution, and you being the one saying I shouldn't do the thing I am perfectly allowed to do.
I find this to be an odd stance. To me, the good neighbor is the one willing to work out a compromise that best suits everyone, rather than the one saying "no, do it my way, and that is the end of the discussion". To me, that person is literally the definition of the bad neighbor.
What you are essentially saying is that I should throw away my Democratic Rights, because Intrepid said so. Worse, you are saying that me opting to not throw away said rights is somehow a loophole, rather than being the obvious way it should be.
Indeed action combat will lower the value of a combat tracker. It won't totally eliminate it though, I mean, trackers are used in Planetside, an MMOFPS.
The problem with your position here is that it relies on the assumption that Intrepid believes players will not use combat trackers in Ashes.
However, we all know that they will exist, and many players will use them.
So, according to you, they are developing the game based on the idea that combat trackers will not be a thing, when they will absolutely be a thing.
This is why it is an illogical decision.
As to your argument about slowing players down, the way content is tied in to node progression does that just fine. Combat trackers are not going to speed that up at all. A fictional lack of them wouldn't slow that down at all either.
And yet, of the two of us, when it comes to combat trackers, I am the one that will get my way.
FFXIV is the best example of an MMO that has a similar stance to trackers as Intrepid currently have. Combat trackers are very prevalent in that game. If you want a game where other people can not track you in combat, Ashes current stance simply will not allow for that.
So perhaps it is you that the game isn't being made for? I'm not willing to say. All I am willing to say is that I will have a combat tracker, and the way things are looking I will be able to track your combat - potentially even if we are on different servers.
I assume you would like that to not be the case, correct?
I never said they can dictate their rights to you.
I said they have expressed they don't want people to use Combat Trackers. That's their statement. But because they can't actually stop you, you don't care about their intent, so you're going to do it anyways.
That's what I said.
So you understand what they are trying to do. You are not going to go along with it, because it's within your rights not to.
That's bad faith, that's bad neighbor. It's legal. It's your right to do so. Doesn't make it good.
The problem is this.
It's never once crossed your mind that the best stance to take might be playing the game the way the developers intend it to be played.
There would be no compromise needed. We'd play in good faith.
But this is unacceptable to you. So even knowing their intent, you're not going to follow it. That's not 'compromise'.
There is a Good Neighbor avenue to be taken here. It's respecting the Developers and playing the game the way they are trying to set it up to be played... which is without combat trackers.
You absolutely refuse that. But some how think you're acting in good faith. That's the issue.
I know, I get it. You're the good guy. You're the hero here, fighting for the 'best solution'. Ever stop to think no one ever goes in thinking their the bad guy? Ever stop to think that by completely disregarding the intent of the Developer that YOU are starting off on the wrong foot?
Of course not. Because this is only an MMO. Obviously you are much bigger than it, what you want matters much more than what the Developers want. If only the Developers would meet YOU halfway, after you completely reject their intention.
If you create an MMORPG, people are going to use combat trackers. As such, create your MMORPG with that in mind.
Yeah, I am all for a compromise of some sort, as should be obvious.
What you are talking about here though, that isn't a compromise (I don't think that word means what you think it means).
What you are talking about here is capitulation, not compromise. You want everyone to just do what you want, without compromise at all.
Nope.
I started out in this thread stating that myself and many others will use trackers in Ashes. This was before Intrepid made their stance on them public.
When they decided that they were not keen on trackers, they already knew that people would use them, and that there was nothing they could do to stop it. They knew that the best they could hope for was something similar to FFXIV, yet they decided to be against them anyway.
How can you then claim that is me that started off on the wrong foot and not Intrepid?
How? Easy.
They've stated that don't want them used. That's the intent and idea of the game, to go back before Trackers and not use them.
You say "F that, I do what I want'. There are PLENTY of games that employ trackers, go play them then.
Instead you are intentionally violating the spirit of the game. That's your stance.
Yes, YOU are the 'Bad Guy' here.
I didn't say "fuck what you say, I'm using them anyway". What happened is I said I was going to use them, along with many other players and they said "fuck that, we don't want you to" (or actually, they said "we don't support that").
You seem to have the order of events backwards here.
Intrepids decision on this matter was made while knowing people - myself included - will use them anyway.
I'm curious as to why you think they are against the spirit of the game - this isn't a statement Steven has made.
Not true
For people who still want to min-max their dmg and want to have a proper comparison they have a training area in which you can fight a scarecrow to figure out your dps. You can also tweak all the stats and skills to your liking in that area which is great for experimenting different kind of builds and skill rotations.
I like that concept way more than just having a normal dps meter. In games that had a dps meter it always got toxic at some point when you didn't do as much dmg as everyone else.
In Lost Ark on the other hand it didn't experience people getting toxic because of low damage.
It didnt always get toxic, that is limited to a very few games.
A number of games had both heavy combat tracker use, and very low toxicity levels. There is no direct connection between the two.
@Ceepex
I agree it shouldnt be something that people feel the need to have on screen at all during content. This is something I have always considered a misuse of combat trackers.
My question is, would it concern you at all if I had one that I could use with my guild, but if you and I were in a group (assuming you are not in my guild), I am unable to see anything you are doing?
Yep, we're here. I've always valued them. I like data. I like min maxing gear etc. I like all that. I would argue that it brings more depth to a game too. Min/maxing combat gives players something else to do while in game when they're tired of farming or raiding or whatever. I'd also argue that they can help players get better at their given role(s). Obviously some people don't like them for various reasons. One of which is people worry they won't be invited to do things because they can't hit a certain number on the meter. I would say to those people, you're in the wrong guild or hanging with the wrong people. Just find a group that is more welcoming and more your style. Willing to help you get better. With or without meters, certain groups will still demand higher skill from their group members and they will still figure out ways to judge if an individual is pulling their weight or not. More importantly, with or without meters, there will always be jerks.
It's not worth arguing over though. Steven and the gang have stated they prefer not to have them, so that's that. I'm sure it will still be fun.
Very true actually the post says it all with everyone's view points against it and one person commenting on every post trying to convince them its not. No one wants it except a extremely tiny group of players.
You don't need a DPS meter to min max, you can learn the game and test things outs without it.
Again, the problem is not combat tracker or not, but how the whole game is designed...
Most activities in Pick Up are the abyssals dungeons, and Guardians...
For abyssal dungeons, just look at all those party asking 1000+ ilvl for the feiton one... (of not 1300+)
And they try to get one 1300+ for each team... sure with such team that can easily kill alaric with half team being useless, no need of toxicity...
For guardians ? one bad sometime just makes the 2 kills slightly longer, and it is if you go party finder, if directly matchmaking you can hope to have only one dude that slows you... then bye... You can't kick during fight, and flaming for flaming is useless. so you accept situation,
Now for raids, how they are makes it people to avoid kicking dude even if they are bad, and prefer to adapt team, or explain again and again... Argos for example, hardest part is second fight, in particular the second mini boss. When there are problematic people, leader just try to re-arrange teams to have enough good people on second miniboss, while keeping enough efficiency for first. (just enough to deal boss) and spamming, again and again "use destro/tornado"
And if wipes come for last fight at this point, people prefer run as seven that leaving.
Because in both, time to find another one, redo first fight, with risk to still have problem is high...
and legion raids, even more in hard mode are less pick up (so toxicity is not a deal there)
The problem is not toxicity against bad people or not (we can see them really fast in a game with really limited heal... and with only 8 people at most, easy to know who is not using bomb/nade) but because how the game is designed, you prefer to go with this deadweight most of time.
And for running argos from day 1, learning people strategies (experienced with RU version) i can say that yes... there are really underperforming people and the whole team knew who without anyone saying it...
The Devs aren't here to negotiate with you. You even say they put out feelers to get a sense of what the community wanted, and AFTER THAT said "We are going with No Trackers". That means that got the info from the COMMUNITY, and from that likely saw THE COMMUNITY at large didn't want them.
Your side lost, right then and there. Community spoke, Devs listened.
Now, you don't like that you lost. But you really didn't, since they can't legally stop you. So, you're going to do it anyways.
Also, think about that... "Regardless of what Intrepid decides, screw them... we're using them anyways" BEFORE they ever announced it they would allow them or not. That's rather hostile, and rather disrespectful.
And yet here you sit still thinking you're the good guy in all this.
From you own words, they hadn't made a decision. You made it clear their decision didn't matter, because you wouldn't be held to any such rules. Yep, really sounds like Good Neighbor there. Nice negotiation.
So then they get feedback from the Community, and come back with "No Trackers, we're going back with that old school feel". Now, as far as we know, they did this because of the Community Feedback. If this is true, not only are you being an ass to Intrepid, but ALSO to the Community.
Because your demand wasn't met, you didn't like the ruling, and you were never going to follow the ruling anyways.
You aren't making the game. You are not the entire Community. From what you've stated, they put out the feelers, they asked what the Community thought, and their response was 'No Tracker'.
So you seem to believe they ignored the Community. You have evidence of that? Show me the data. Ever stop to consider they listened, and the numbers were in the favor of those that didn't want Trackers? Thus they honored the Community, and you crap all over it and Intrepid because you simply won't play by those rules.
So good, if you don't play by the rules though... you probably shouldn't play at all. That's the Bad Neighbor part in all of this. You have no respect for Intrepid or the Community. But in your mind you're the vigilant Knight defending the Community from the Tyrant Steven that didn't listen to you the first time when you fairly warned him that no matter what Intrepid decided, you were using Trackers regardless.
Every way you've tried to spin and defend this, you come out looking like the bad guy. None of the explaining to make it look better, made it look better.
From you own words, they asked. Community responded. From there you feel Community wasn't heard, Steven just chucked the voices out the window. He crapped all over them, and now we're here. That's your version of things.
The problem comes with us having plenty of people here expressing they don't want them, and very few saying they do. If that happened when Steven asked, then he DID listen to the Community, and that's how we got the decision.
If the ToS says No Trackers, I do hope you just simply get banned. I don't want people that will agree to a ToS they won't honor, just because they have a loop hole. That's as real as I can be about it. This is the literal thing that makes you the Bad Neighbor.
Now, on your way Valiant Knight, Savior of Ashes, Never Of Wrong.
Invader: threatens war if neighboring kingdom doesn't cede its lands to him.
Kingdom: doesn't cede its lands and announces that they're willing to go to war to protect their lands.
Invader: "See? I'm the good guy. They should have just let me have the lands, since everyone was going to invade them anyway. Now they're just being combative and mean to everyone. They don't understand our needs."
2077 Players arguing they need their AI meter to tell them what skills to use and when and give them information. Since there is so much going on in the game and they aren't skilled or knowledge able to keep up with their own brain, so they need AI to do things for them.
People out here trying to defends DPS meters "The meter isn't toxic people are toxic."
( -____-) Yes people are toxic
The game is too hard we need dps meters ~Dark soul players~ My disappointment is immeasurable.
Intrepid listening to feedback on no dps meters and everyone cheers.
People wanting DPS meters regardless of community feedback
Had to meme this sorry lmao.
Not at all. I would like that actually. I would use it while I play with my friends as well, I would just hate it if in a group with "randoms" everyone can see each others dps/hps and then everything becomes about who does or does not do enough dps/hps.
But then the problem is when one can activate/deactivate showing their stats to the group, the ones who refuse to do it will get kicked from partys you know? so I don't think there can be a middle ground so better not include it unless I am missing something.