What's the difference between a merged parse, and, the alternative that I don't really know about. Why is it preferable/more popular, and how would I go and set it up to use it?
Merged parse vs. what alternative?
Printable View
-
07-13-2015, 01:31 PMGarashMerged parse vs. what alternative?
-
07-13-2015, 01:40 PMViridianaWell, a merged parse, if one were to use a parser, would not parse the downtime that's causing the encounter to split. If we take Ravana EX as an example, there are some breaks in there where you go 20 seconds or more without having anything available to attack. If your hypothetical parser has a setting that says "End encounter after X seconds with no action" and it's set to default at, like, 6, then you have 14 seconds or more of your encounter that aren't being counted in the "per second" part of DPS when you merge the encounters. This would, of course, inflate the ratio of damage to seconds, and make one's DPS bigger than it should be.Quote:
Originally Posted by Garash
-
07-13-2015, 02:08 PMWhiston
Additionally, it gives a more accurate kill time.
If you had a 30 second phase, with a 20 second break, and killed it after three phases, a merged result would look like you bet it in 90 seconds as opposed to the more accurate 130 seconds. -
07-13-2015, 08:32 PMHumorless
Options - Main table/encounter - General - Number of seconds to wait after the last combat action to begin a new encounter - set to high enough number (IE 25s) from the standard 6s.
-
07-13-2015, 11:13 PMAllyrionI guess the latter part is a matter of perception.Quote:
Originally Posted by Viridiana
I use an extended reset timer because it shows the full encounter time. This is true, I don't like cutting the downtime over the fight.
But I don't think downtime should be counted for DPS, generally. I'd rather have more consistent numbers based on the damage when you're actually fighting.
DPS is skewed during downtime, putting you at 0 while you're waiting around.
So, to me, it gets DPS is deflated and lower than it should be with downtime.
I liked parsers from other games where you can damage as the accurate but broader measure of how much you contributed over the course of the fight, while DPS is what you're able to do while you're actually fighting. -
07-13-2015, 11:28 PMHumorlessExcept every game parses you while you're in combat, even during downtime. It's the only way to normalize the encounter for the entire playerbase.Quote:
Originally Posted by Allyrion
"dps is lower than it should be"? Compared to what? I want to see how I do compared to others regardless of what happens in the fight. Parsing phases is stupid, because you can't compare. You don't know who used what cooldown when and whether it pays off over the entire fight. Parsing the entire fight in one go also gives you a baseline for yourself to beat in future runs with no variation.
Nobody serious about raiding takes merged parses seriously. It's pointless other than wanting to see bigger numbers for your e-peen. -
07-14-2015, 12:21 AMAllyrionI don't think you understood what I meant.Quote:
Originally Posted by Humorless
Parsers can account for the whole of an encounter and have uptime cutoffs while not being merged.
Once you're in-combat, the parse starts and only ends till you get out of combat. Nothing is lost.
DPS gets measured during uptime. You see the damage people do while they're fighting.
That doesn't mean that everything else isn't still recorded during the downtime.
E-peen really has little to do with it because the damage is relative.
In those parses, everyone's numbers are higher and that's the standard. Even if it was like that here, it's not like people will feel better about the numbers because everyone will have those.
All it would do is distinguish damage contribution over the course of the fight and the DPS people sustain during uptime. That's it.
Like I said, I use extended parse timers cause if you merge then you lose data.
It wouldn't have to be like that if every parse started recording once you're in combat and ended once out of combat. The cut-offs are simply built-in for the dps counter itself but all the data is recorded and damage gives you an accurate assessment of your contribution overall.
Also, just to be clear, everyone's data has their cut-off individually to their own attacks so there's no disparity. After 5-6 seconds of a person not attacking, their dps stops being affected but everyone else who's attacking is.
It's just a distinction (damage per second when attacking vs damage overall in the fight) that I've found helpful in guilds before.
Again, everything is recorded. I didn't say otherwise, just said downtime doesn't need to affect dps.
You will still have a baseline dps and no data is lost, including cooldown usage.
Since you said that in retort, I don't think you understood.
In fact, you have a much better baseline across different fights since phases affect the dps number itself.
There's less if a disparity between fights, where each one needs a new standard due to different amounts of downtime.
That's one of the better things about that system. -
07-14-2015, 01:27 AMHumorlessSigh... just try your method and make sure multiple people parse the fight, then compare the merge. There will be a lot of variance. It's an awful parsing method and you shouldn't use it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Allyrion
If anything, do it because otherwise you won't be able to compare your own parses to just about anything else on the forums. -
07-14-2015, 02:06 AMAllyrionWhat part of 'I'm not talking about merging' do you not get here?Quote:
Originally Posted by Humorless
I was comparing to other games which can have client side parsers that can tell when you're in-combat and when combat ends, instead of just recording the last time an action was used.
I'm not advocating merging which is a faulty system and causes you to lose data.
I'm saying that's only a limitation of limited combat recording. If combat was recorded from the time the game registers that you're in-combat (when you can't do out of combat things) to when you're out of combat (you're still in-combat during phase downtime) then you get a more accurate recording.
Anyway, I just said twice I don't use merging and I was only lamenting the limitation of FFXIV's combat logging, but you're telling me not merge.
Or recording by the game registered combat allows everything to be recorded, and therefore has less variance than what we have now.
So I'm just going to assume you're not even reading what I replied.
Anyway, I'm done since this is derailing the thread.
Plus I think you're probably trolling since it's hard believe anyone would've read my reply and thought I was advocating merging when I directly stated otherwise.
To the OP:
Yea, merging doesn't work because you lose data when it's not recording.
I keep my wait time around 25-30s before it begins a new encounter.