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

Noaani

TheClimbTo1 wrote: »

A combat tracker, by definition, IS assisting you.

If it wasn't you wouldn't need it. It's assisting you on gathering all the data.

You are conflating labels with literal meaning of the words those labels contain.

We generally feel MMOs are in a crap state. We don't WANT most MMOs. That's the point of Ashes.

Indeed.

Not sure what this has to do with combat trackers though.

So, the ancestor of MMO's are MUD's (multi-user dungeons). These were basically text based games that attempted to emulate D&D. The first of them was at the time just called MUD, but has since been referred to commonly as either MUD1 or EssexMUD. It was made by Richard Bartle (of Bartle test fame, follow Dygz enough and you'll here him randomly give his score as if it actually means anything).

It was released to the University of Essex network in 1978.

In 1979, VisiCalc was released - the first spreadsheet. By the end of 1979, people were using VisiCalc to improve at EssexMUD.

By the time we got to Meridian 59 (generally considered the first MMO as we know them now - released in 1996 iirc), there were scripts written so that you could just paste in to the first cell of an Excel spreadsheet to get all the data from recent combat. As far as I can tell, this concept originated with AoL's Neverwinter in 1991, but that game doesn't technically classify as an MMORPG (I assume the first 'M' isn't present, but I am not sure).

Combat trackers are basically just that exact same thing, but with built in spreadsheet functionality.

Basically, what I am saying is that combat trackers as a general concept have been around for almost two decades longer than MMO's have been around, and there hasn't been an actual time in which MMO's existed where combat trackers for them did not exist.

So sure, we are not happy with the current state of MMO's. I think a lot of people agree with that statement.

However, since combat trackers have been a part of MMO's since literally before their beginning, we can't then point to combat trackers as having had any part at all in the current state of them.

There are many other things that we can point fingers at and say this is why MMO's for the last decade have sucked. One is the incessant insistence of almost all MMO's in that time to attempt to implement some form of action combat. The last full tab target game to launch, as far as I am concerned, is Rift, in 2011.

Another thing we can point our finger at and say "this is at least in part to blame" is the notion developers have of trying to have game wide communities, rather than smaller, server based communities. It is no surprise that games with cross server content and/or automatic group formation are the games that tend to have the worst communities. On the other hand, games that break players down in to smaller communities with much less access to crossing in to another community - these games tend to have better communities.

We can also point to the insistence of MMO's to use daily, weekly or monthly quests or rewards of what ever kind in order to get people playing the game longer than they would otherwise play. Having people log in every day because they don't want to miss out on what ever is on offer is not a good way to maintain a good community in an online setting. You want people to log in because they want to log in, and not log in if they would rather not. You also don't want people feeling like they have an hour long chore list when they log in to your game that they need to do before they can go off any do anything fun.

Then we could look at the participation trophies that games give out. Achievements for getting to level 3 and shit like that. If something is not an achievement, don't call it an achievement.

How about we look at getting rid of some of this shit that didn't actually exist in MMO's back when we all agree they were better, rather than looking at things like trackers that absolutely did exist back then?

Noaani

Asgerr wrote: »

That it is acceptable to speculate on the possible consequences of the presence of DPS meters/Combat trackers in a game, without it constituting a fallacious argument.

Oh, so what you are saying here is that you couldn't fill in the blanks yourself. You couldn't work out if there were perhaps any steps that could come between not having combat and not having combat trackers.

Well, I'll fill you in on them.

Pen and paper
Calculator
Excel

The next step after Excel is a combat tracker.

Sure, arguing for no combat is perhaps a facetious or flippant argument. However, the argument at it's foundation is sound. Replace the concept of no combat at all with the above list, and you start to see why the notion of a slippery slope in this regard is a foolish argument.

Aerlana

TheClimbTo1 wrote: »

A combat tracker, by definition, IS assisting you.

so... a tool that do measures is a tool saying you what to do...
.
In my work i have 2 kind of tools, one that gather metrics, and one that assist me.

The first are tools you are probably using in your own life often, and some few specialised. But one example is... a ruler

The seconds are software where i take informations i gathered and gave me all results... No more work to do. (aside using my own experience to see if results are dubious, due to bugs, or bad inputs)

This is the difference between a combat tracker (gathering data easy to read) and combat assistant (says you all information you want without puting any effort in it)
The first just show me raw numbers i can work on. and from those raw numbers, i can have lot of answers.
The seconds gives me all answers... (And i know some people doing the same work, so accustomed of those assisting tool not able anymore to do the work themselves... which is a problem sometime)

And you are using second as arguments against first.

Combat tracker is just a .xls it doesn't gives any final information, it is still raw numbers you have to work on to get your answers.

If you want your reasonning true, you also have to fight against combat log... because they also assist us about understanding how the game works, how the class work, what are the best skills of the class, etc etc... The combat tracker is just an organised view of all things already written in combat log.

And when you say "we come on ashes to flee other mmorpg" : true
People come here to find back some elements of the old design, back in 2005 and even before
In old good time... when people ALREADY used combat tracker... EQ, my first mmorpg, i went i a guild that used it (not mandatory to have it ourselves but officer used it a lot) WoW was not released yet...
Steven speaks about creating a game with what they were back in those time, in this golden age ? Fine... there was combat tracker.

Oh and a last point about "respecting tos" : on FFXIV tools like reshade are forbidden. while i don't care, all my friends, and nearly all of their various FC are using it. it even made a drama when a player which modded her game and share a little too much about it on twitter was banned... for modding, while it was already done A LOT... people tried to make her unban, while modding is totally against the TOS (so it was totally rightfull for SE to ban her, and unrightfull for people to defend her... ) So all those people (probably large majority of FFXIV) that does those things, against the tos, are all bad neighbors ? ...

Asgerr wrote: »

If you wanna use another false equivalence: it's like banning guns (picturing a US situation here). Because one person is capable of using their gun properly and without causing harm to others, doesn't mean that others won't and haven't already caused harm. The easiest solution then? Ban everyone from having access to guns (except maybe the devs for whatever testing reasons etc).

This is the problem about the debate around tracker
People put all fault on it, but refuse to see the real problem is how easy it is to exclude people...

Remove combat tracker in any form in wow, this will change nearly nothing, people will remain toxic, will kick people they think are making their dungeon run harder. and will find always new way to discriminate, and mostly... even more dumb way...
I mean, just look at wow or FFXIV party finder... lot of parties just ask insane ilvl, or the proof of kill the second week (wow) or second day (FFXIV) of the content... And then, if a people is a problem, it is kick because will find another dude in less than one minute...

Now get in a game where replacing a dude takes 20 or more minutes (because you have to go back in town, do the call, recruit, then run back to dungeon)... don't worry people will keep with them the bad guy (be it because he takes all AOE, break cc or have bad damages) and try to finish dungeon with him...
In FFXIV i even saw votekick against tank or healer because they refuse to do the door to door pulls... No combat tracker there, just because the tank want to play chill pack after pack, i saw people doing votekick ! More often than votekick against people that try to force the mass pull which is, for me ... a good reason to kick a healer/DPS...

in 15 years of mmorpg, always people were kicked because other thinks it would lead to a faster clean of the content to replace him. But if replacement is long to do, don't worry people will stop kicking for any small problem.
When even with duty finder, there were long time to find a tank... people still played the dungeon with the really bad tank. Because while with tank the dungeon went form a 20 minutes to 30 minutes run, kicking him was easily getting to a 40 minutes run due to the loooong time to get a new one.

This is why dutyfinder is one of the worst thing ever in MMORPG... this is why cross server is another one of the worst thing in mmorpg. This is one of reasons family teleportation will be a problem in AOC if it exist.

Find the real ennemy of what you want. here is not the data, but the easy replacement of people.

Asgerr

Noaani wrote: »

Asgerr wrote: »

That it is acceptable to speculate on the possible consequences of the presence of DPS meters/Combat trackers in a game, without it constituting a fallacious argument.

Oh, so what you are saying here is that you couldn't fill in the blanks yourself. You couldn't work out if there were perhaps any steps that could come between not having combat and not having combat trackers.

Well, I'll fill you in on them.

Pen and paper
Calculator
Excel

The next step after Excel is a combat tracker.

Sure, arguing for no combat is perhaps a facetious or flippant argument. However, the argument at it's foundation is sound. Replace the concept of no combat at all with the above list, and you start to see why the notion of a slippery slope in this regard is a foolish argument.

If you want to go through the effort of pulling out an Excel sheet or working it out by pen and paper, more power to you.
Just don't add the automated systems and optional assistance that a tracker offers.

We're all saying, if you wanna logic it by yourself during or after combat, cool. Just don't bring in a program to do it for you and give you instant results, with which people might then create toxic situations.

The sheer fact that it would require people any effort to work it out with pen and paper or Excel sheets etc, would be enough of a deterrent for many people to never actually do it. And for those strong willed enough, then at least they're investing time and effort into it. Which then limits their time for dungeon runs or other more productive activities.

TheClimbTo1

Noaani wrote: »

TheClimbTo1 wrote: »

You don't respect that intent at all

Of course not.

Ashes is going to be a competitive game. People are going to use what advantages they can. If I am on a server with a guild that is using a combat tracker to optimize builds and such, me and my guild will be at a disadvantage if we do not also do the same.

Since there is literally nothing at all Intrepid can do about it, I cant rely on them stepping in.

As such, what kind of a guild leader would I be if I knowingly left useful tools that we are essentially free to use on the table?

In order to respect intent, they need to have an ability to back that up. Respect is - after all - earned.

Sure, they can't enforce it, but you understand the intent from the developer and you choose to ignore it. That's the issue.

You're still not getting it.

Their intent doesn't matter.

It would honestly be like some HoA or something in Texas saying "no guns in this neighborhood - that is our rule!". There are laws superseding that "rule", and so that rule simply does not apply to anyone. Obviously, no one is going to take that rule seriously, because of the Second Amendment (I believe that's the right one - not sure, not my laws). You are not going to begrudge someone in that area for owning and possessing a gun, because clearly the law allows them to do so, and the stupid little HoA does not get to remove the Constitutional Rights of the people in that HoA.

That is literally the situation here. Intrepid can ask all they want, but asking is all they can do, and I am free to say no. The fact that I am saying no many years before the game releases gives Intrepid time to come up with other options if they desire, or just live with how things are (which is the most likely outcome).

The problem isn't even Trackers or No Trackers here. We're beyond that. The actual problem here is just you. Your blatant disregard. You have plenty of Trackers Allowed games to play. But you aren't content with that, for some reason.

You're so conceited, so wrapped up in yourself. There are games for you out there. Instead of accepting that maybe this one isn't, you're going to force what you want through. Because it's all about you. Rules be damned. Others be damned. It's YOU, baby. Nothing else.

This is the hill you choose to die on. That no matter what Intrepid decides, it doesn't matter... you've already decided you are going to do what you want. Period. When you could just choose to play a game that allows Trackers, and choose to not play games that don't.

It's people like you that screw it up for everyone else.

You could simply say "Hey, they don't want us to use Trackers. I'll give it a try, and if I can't abide by that I'll go back to games that allow them." Nope, screw that. It's your world. You can ALSO say "I believe if they don't use Trackers, they will fail.". And you might be right, time will tell.

But we're here, as I stated, as Steven stated, because we feel the MMO Genre has fallen from grace. We don't want 'Most MMOs'. Here you are fighting that spirit. If you want most MMOs, go play them. They're still there. This isn't them.

akabear

Jahlon provided his view on combat trackers in a video some time ago. He outlined something along the lines of how his partner was struggling to do well at X MMO. They used a combat tracker to review her gameplay and made adjustments to take her from say an E grade player to a B grade player.

Kind of takes away the value of earning skill and gaining experience. There`s no journey.

He also stated that he is using a tracker regardless of being acceptable or not.

I got reasonably proficient in pvp in L2 through several thousand fights. Sucked for the first 1,000 fights. but that was ok.. . learning through playing, discussing with clan post and pre-fights, scanning the simple in-game damage logs was enough..

No clan members used combat trackers, just attentive game play, practice, practice, practice and trial and error and lots of discussion.. in fact learning together with the trials and errors was what made a tight guild and a mmo social

A damage log, as I think already planned, is all that is needed.

Noaani

Asgerr wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Asgerr wrote: »

That it is acceptable to speculate on the possible consequences of the presence of DPS meters/Combat trackers in a game, without it constituting a fallacious argument.

Oh, so what you are saying here is that you couldn't fill in the blanks yourself. You couldn't work out if there were perhaps any steps that could come between not having combat and not having combat trackers.

Well, I'll fill you in on them.

Pen and paper
Calculator
Excel

The next step after Excel is a combat tracker.

Sure, arguing for no combat is perhaps a facetious or flippant argument. However, the argument at it's foundation is sound. Replace the concept of no combat at all with the above list, and you start to see why the notion of a slippery slope in this regard is a foolish argument.

If you want to go through the effort of pulling out an Excel sheet or working it out by pen and paper, more power to you.
Just don't add the automated systems and optional assistance that a tracker offers.

Cool, that is where your position is.

What you shouldn't then do is argue against people using Excel, for fear that it leads to combat trackers.

Putting aside what we each want in terms of combat trackers, I'm sure you understand this point.

Shift this one step up, and it is the argument that was being presented - you shouldnt have combat trackers because it leads to combat assistants.

From what I have seen of you, you are able to see that this is a poor argument. It being a poor argument does not mean you need to disagree with the position the person making the argument has towards trackers, just that the argument is a poor one to make.

Noaani

TheClimbTo1 wrote: »

The problem isn't even Trackers or No Trackers here. We're beyond that. The actual problem here is just you. Your blatant disregard. You have plenty of Trackers Allowed games to play. But you aren't content with that, for some reason.

You seem to think I came in to this community at the same point in time as you - I've been here for 5 years now.

I mean, I put $500 on this game long before their stance on trackers was known.

It wasnt something I even considered looking in to before putting that money down - because literally no game has ever sustained a position against trackers, so why would this one?

After putting that money down, they decided to take up the position they have.

Since I am not obliged to agree with that position, nor to abide by it at all, I will not.

I have at times said that I would gladly take a refund of the money I have put in to the game, should Intrepid offer it.

Asgerr

Noaani wrote: »

Asgerr wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Asgerr wrote: »

That it is acceptable to speculate on the possible consequences of the presence of DPS meters/Combat trackers in a game, without it constituting a fallacious argument.

Oh, so what you are saying here is that you couldn't fill in the blanks yourself. You couldn't work out if there were perhaps any steps that could come between not having combat and not having combat trackers.

Well, I'll fill you in on them.

Pen and paper
Calculator
Excel

The next step after Excel is a combat tracker.

Sure, arguing for no combat is perhaps a facetious or flippant argument. However, the argument at it's foundation is sound. Replace the concept of no combat at all with the above list, and you start to see why the notion of a slippery slope in this regard is a foolish argument.

If you want to go through the effort of pulling out an Excel sheet or working it out by pen and paper, more power to you.
Just don't add the automated systems and optional assistance that a tracker offers.

Cool, that is where your position is.

What you shouldn't then do is argue against people using Excel, for fear that it leads to combat trackers.

Putting aside what we each want in terms of combat trackers, I'm sure you understand this point.

Shift this one step up, and it is the argument that was being presented - you shouldnt have combat trackers because it leads to combat assistants.

From what I have seen of you, you are able to see that this is a poor argument. It being a poor argument does not mean you need to disagree with the position the person making the argument has towards trackers, just that the argument is a poor one to make.

Combat assistants are an issue, true, but it's not the main reason why I would rather DPS meters/combat trackers don't exist. Those tools lead to gatekeeping, toxicity and overall negative social interactions.

It's not a poor argument, though, when it is rooted in multiply reported empirical causality (annecdotal though you may wish to paint it). Will there be people who manage to have positive interactions despite the existence and usage of those tools? Yes. Will people still behave poorly to each other without them? Yes.

Does the presence of those tools increase the propensity and likelihood of a negative social interaction taking place? Yes. Can people clear the content presented in the game without them? Yes. Will it make the experience more rewarding despite possible initial struggles? Yes (as proven by games like the Elden Soulsborne series, who also include online content).

Furthermore, I would posit that DPS meters/combat trackers + combat assistants, are in great part useful for the top 1% of players trying to optimize and maximise their combat output, in hopes of winning certain content races.

In Ashes, World 1st races won't be a thing. Neither will Regional 1st or Server 1st ones. By virtue of the content being Node development locked, and Raids being either Open World or Open world dungeons, there won't really be races for 1st place in the traditional sense.

That is, in my opinion, one extra reason as to why these types of tools are not required. They go sum themselves up to the ranks of:

The game developer doesn't want them
A majority of people don't want them (going by forums + reddit posts and comments)
These tools have already harmed players, content and the way content is developed in other games (WoW as a classic primary offender)

Noaani

Asgerr wrote: »

Does the presence of those tools increase the propensity and likelihood of a negative social interaction taking place? Yes.

I disagree with this statement.

I have had far more positive interactions because of trackers (literally hundreds) than I have had negative interactions because of trackers (literally zero).

While I get that some people would have had negative interactions because of them, there are - from what I can see - far more people that are taking other negative experiences and blaming them on trackers.

If you are in a group running content in WoW, and you are obviously slower than the rest of the group, the group is going to replace you. This isnt the fault of trackers, it is the fault of the LFG system (and the fault of the player for not being fast enough - they are as much to blame as anyone here).

Remove trackers and the group can still see you are slower and so will replace you. Remove the LFG system and the group is unlikely to replace you because getting a replacement to them is going to be difficult.

How can we then point to the tracker and say it is at fault?

You may be right about Ashes not having world firsts, but you also may not be. I would suspect that there will be a singular boss that is the apex of the game, and would also expect to see one for each expansion. If not a specific boss, then a specific quest chain or some such.

Server firsts though, they will absolutely be a thing.

I will say, based on the above post, you have decided to drop the argument that was being made about combat trackers being bad because they will lead to combat assistants. This is a good decision.

Asgerr

Noaani wrote: »

Asgerr wrote: »

Does the presence of those tools increase the propensity and likelihood of a negative social interaction taking place? Yes.

I disagree with this statement.

I have had far more positive interactions because of trackers (literally hundreds) than I have had negative interactions because of trackers (literally zero).

While I get that some people would have had negative interactions because of them, there are - from what I can see - far more people that are taking other negative experiences and blaming them on trackers.

The question here would be whether those interactions happened in the controlled space of your own Guild or raid groups/raid group adjacent people, and how many happened in an uncontrolled space (such as with pugs).

Unfortunately we don't have a clear means for us to dissect everyone's negative interactions which they're blaming on trackers, to figure out what percentage of blame does in fact lie with those tools. So I personally chose to believe the person saying that the blame lies with said tools.

Noaani wrote: »

Asgerr wrote: »

Does the presence of those tools increase the propensity and likelihood of a negative social interaction taking place? Yes.

If you are in a group running content in WoW, and you are obviously slower than the rest of the group, the group is going to replace you. This isnt the fault of trackers, it is the fault of the LFG system (and the fault of the player for not being fast enough - they are as much to blame as anyone here).

Remove trackers and the group can still see you are slower and so will replace you. Remove the LFG system and the group is unlikely to replace you because getting a replacement to them is going to be difficult.

In WoW? Yes. That does indeed tend to happen. In other games such as FFXIV? Doesn't happen nearly as much if at all.

The difference in my opinion? WoW has had for many years a far more prevalent culture of combat trackers existing in the game. As well has having had the content designed for specific types of players, leading to toxicity from certain groups (thinking of mythic keys for instance).

I do agree that the lack of an LFG system also helps in reducing the instant replacement kind of toxicity. Doesn't however prevent the entire (admittedly harder than necessary) run from being toxic.

Noaani wrote: »

Asgerr wrote: »

Does the presence of those tools increase the propensity and likelihood of a negative social interaction taking place? Yes.

You may be right about Ashes not having world firsts, but you also may not be. I would suspect that there will be a singular boss that is the apex of the game, and would also expect to see one for each expansion. If not a specific boss, then a specific quest chain or some such.

Server firsts though, they will absolutely be a thing.

I will say, based on the above post, you have decided to drop the argument that was being made about combat trackers being bad because they will lead to combat assistants. This is a good decision.

Servers firsts may be a thing if the content in question is Instanced, thus allowing multiple groups from racing fairly against the other. If the boss is open world, groups will ultimately screw each other over and fight over a boss, leading to a harder measure of what a first is.

The only other way to do it, would then be: take turns and see who kills it faster. And then you're once again rendering the use of a combat tracker, nearly mandatory to a small subsect of players only, whilst still opening the door for issues for those people whose gaming experience wouldn't otherwise depend on the presence of those tools.

Warth

I don't understand what people's obsession with "firsts" are anway. Especially for things that can be cleared by a significant amount of players anyway.

Firsts are, by any measure, a competitive measure employed by mostly themepark mmos and irrelevant in almost everything else.

Which is fair, ad In themeparks it makes sense. In most other games including open world mmos it does not

Neither do the existance of firsts have any relevancy to the existance to DPS meters. They can happen (or not) whether dps meters exist or not. Solely the effort required to be on top is higher without them. Which makes it not relevant as an argument

akabear

Would have thought "firsts" will only ever be per server and not game wide as conditions between servers will hopefully be dynamically incomparable

Warth

akabear wrote: »

Would have thought "firsts" will only ever be per server and not game wide as conditions between servers will hopefully be dynamically incomparable

True

akabear

Interested to see what happens to those that decide to test Intrepid`s boundaries of terms and conditions of the game, whatever those boundaries end up being.

Noaani

Asgerr wrote: »

In WoW? Yes. That does indeed tend to happen. In other games such as FFXIV? Doesn't happen nearly as much if at all.

The difference in my opinion? WoW has had for many years a far more prevalent culture of combat trackers existing in the game. As well has having had the content designed for specific types of players, leading to toxicity from certain groups (thinking of mythic keys for instance).

There are some issues with this as an opinion - or, more to the point, as an opinion, it is formed using incomplete data.

If combat trackers were the difference between the WoW and FFXIV communities - with WoW being more toxic because it has a longer history of their use - how do EQ, EQ2, Rift, LotRO, Vanguard, Age of Conan and a number of other games fit in?

Each of these games had combat trackers right from the start, yet each of them have far less toxic communities than WoW.

What about Archeage? That game is even more toxic tha WoW, yet hardly anyone uses combat trackers.

Fact is, when you gather more samples, there is no correlation between the toxicity of an MMO community and the level of combat tracker usage in that community. It just doesn't line up.

What does line up though, is the reliance on other players in relation to toxicity levels. Games where you need others (to get group invites, as an example) have communities that are far less toxic. Games where you dont need to rely on others (LFG system, or other forms of automated grouping) are more toxic.

Specific to WoW, we cant really use things like mythic raiding as an excuse for the games player base. Mythic raids weren't introduced until 2014, and the game had a reputation for a shit community in 2007. As a point of note, the LFG system was added in 2006.

You cant even use the notion of just top end raids as being a source for WoWs community, as WoW by no means has the most exclusive content (Ive seen encounters that have been killed by less than 100 people in total).

Now, this doesnt mean you need to suddenly be all for combat trackers - it just means that the argument that trackers cause toxicity holds no objective weight.

Servers firsts may be a thing if the content in question is Instanced, thus allowing multiple groups from racing fairly against the other. If the boss is open world, groups will ultimately screw each other over and fight over a boss, leading to a harder measure of what a first is.

The only other way to do it, would then be: take turns and see who kills it faster. And then you're once again rendering the use of a combat tracker, nearly mandatory to a small subsect of players only, whilst still opening the door for issues for those people whose gaming experience wouldn't otherwise depend on the presence of those tools.

I disagree.

The way to do it would be to base it on who gets the loot.

Sure, guilds may fight over it, but that's the point.

Noaani

akabear wrote: »

Would have thought "firsts" will only ever be per server and not game wide as conditions between servers will hopefully be dynamically incomparable

To me, this depends on if there are lore based figures in the game at all or not, or if there is an apex boss for the game or not (would be odd if there isnt one).

If there is lore in the game about a given entity, and your guild is the first in the game to kill it, you are obviously going to brag. In fact, we can be fairly sure that castles will fit in to this specific scenario.

I do agree with your point on it being interesting to see how Intrepid react to those they know are using combat trackers (such as myself).

I mean, they will have a hard time making them against the ToS, and if they did, they would still need proof that you are using one.

akabear

I follow this thread as it is interesting but at the same time nonsense to me as I am not, and unlikely to be, a player that will aim to be in a category to probably require or need a tracker.

I used a combat tracker mod in ESO, if you can call it one, and all it ever told me was how significantly annihilated I got in pvp with some outrageous one hit deaths of 2-3x my hp. Never bothered in pve.
Any only time ever used..

To me pvp is the hardest content in game.. hard pve content is of negligible interest. People are just so much harder to navigate.. And with AoC having such a range of classes and possible party setup outcomes, coupled with gear that will not distinguish class types so well, I cannot see pvp being something calculatable, just feel until metas are worked out and then a numbers game..

Oh, and I was a pretty hopeless pvp`er in L2 but with a clan that seem to cross paths alot, by default got thrown into the fore and got pk`ed dozens of times before I had a go at fighting back..and with serveral hundred fights was still pretty ordinary, but after several 1000 fights actually really enjoyed it.

But for L2, was painful, a good round of pvp lost 0.5% of a level XP per death. and a good round of pvp some days might have died 3-4s. and at that level 0.5% xp took 2hrs to gain.. so for each death. was 2 hrs to make up.. each pvp round might be 4-8hrs to make up.. so there was plenty of adrenaline and very calculated

Hopefully there pvp encounters do take a number of hits to take someone down so that one does not have to consider fleeing at the sight of more than one combatant.

Noaani

akabear wrote: »

I follow this thread as it is interesting but at the same time nonsense to me as I am not, and unlikely to be, a player that will aim to be in a category to probably require or need a tracker.

I used a combat tracker mod in ESO, if you can call it one, and all it ever told me was how significantly annihilated I got in pvp with some outrageous one hit deaths of 2-3x my hp. Never bothered in pve.
Any only time ever used..

To me pvp is the hardest content in game.. hard pve content is of negligible interest. People are just so much harder to navigate.. And with AoC having such a range of classes and possible party setup outcomes, coupled with gear that will not distinguish class types so well, I cannot see pvp being something calculatable, just feel until metas are worked out and then a numbers game..

Hopefully there pvp encounters do take a number of hits to take someone down so that one does not have to consider fleeing at the sight of more than one combatant.

Combat trackers are more useful the longer a given fight goes on.

This is why they are invaluable in raids, where it is common for a single fight to go on for 20 minutes, and I have seen some individual encounters that take an hour or longer.

In PvP where you can be killed in a second or two, they aren't really able to tell you anything past what you saw on screen.

With the TTK in Ashes being targeted at around 30 seconds though, that leaves a reasonable amount of scope for a tracker to be useful in PvP - much more than a game like ESO. Those that use one (correctly) absolutely will have an advantage over those that do not, but those that do not use one will have an advantage over those that use one incorrectly.

It's hard to say at this point how it would play out in large scale PvP. You will have an advantage if you used one to prep, but I wouldn't want to guess if it would be of use to use it during a siege.

akabear

Yeah, I hope the time to kill is as you said as one shot kills should never be in a game.

I recall a fight in L2 that went a good 15-20min, until buffs died, as the tank I was trying to kill with a ranger just would not die and the tank could just not deal enough damage nor get close. Even took off my armor just to tease..!

Some of the fights that were most memorable went on a good 5-10min.

I also hope terrain has a play, height, cover, concealment and range.

I hope we have ability to pick up sticks or arrows, and arrange little camp fires on dead bodies, just to rub it in!

Child Item