Parsing needs to go.

Parsing has only been out for a little while and already experiencing a lot of toxic wow-like community behavior about it. Mind you I haven't used it myself but I understand the concept of it, and I've already had a group that was intentionally doing a compromising strat on an EX trial to "pad their parse" and kicking anyone who had an issue with it. Didn't have anything about it in the PF info and got mad that people, who joined to actually complete the duty, had an issue with it. Guess this is what you get with the communities merging.

Different playstyles is a valid reason to kick. Which is more toxic in itself than any parser could ever be.

Imho.

Also, people have been parsing since... Well, the very beginning.

Jusy relax! ^^

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MorbidMisfortune

Parsing has only been out for a little while and already experiencing a lot of toxic wow-like community behavior about it. Mind you I haven't used it myself but I understand the concept of it, and I've already had a group that was intentionally doing a compromising strat on an EX trial to "pad their parse" and kicking anyone who had an issue with it. Didn't have anything about it in the PF info and got mad that people, who joined to actually complete the duty, had an issue with it. Guess this is what you get with the communities merging.

---

Parsing has been around since ARR—which released in 2013. It isn’t new. And it isn’t going anywhere.

Also, the PF leader sets the rules and strats, and is allowed to remove people that don’t want to follow them as they see fit. Their party, their rules. You can always join another one or create one of your own with no such strats or rules. While it’s nice to put strats in the description, it’s not mandatory and cannot be enforced. And if it’s discussed prior to pulling, better to just remove yourself if you disagree with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MorbidMisfortune

Parsing has only been out for a little while and already experiencing a lot of toxic wow-like community behavior about it. Mind you I haven't used it myself but I understand the concept of it, and I've already had a group that was intentionally doing a compromising strat on an EX trial to "pad their parse" and kicking anyone who had an issue with it. Didn't have anything about it in the PF info and got mad that people, who joined to actually complete the duty, had an issue with it. Guess this is what you get with the communities merging.

---

You really want to avoid players who are openly kicking others without having mentioned any strat on PF. These types of players we normally call "inconsistent parsers" who are putting way more effort than they need to to barely even get a 95. While a top tier parser is just getting 99 while helping players clear/doing weekly loot/farming mounts etc.

At high level of parsing, we don't really need any kind of super strat to get high parses. You can greed on a downtime strat without wiping the group.

Look at illya's strat for example for LR on E8s, people complained so much about the downtime. Yet there are players like Xeno or Fox getting top ranked with it. While greeding responsibly, on Melee/Tank.

I have also been parsing these ex trials and have done this for savage on ShB, and will do so when savage releases in a few days. While i see some actual "Parse" group hosters. Spending an hour to get 1 clear, constantly wiping, for everyone to only get a high purple or bad parse and raging. Meanwhile i am getting my 95-99 on the farm groups that is getting multiple clears and also getting mount, or just helping players clear.

I'm not saying, certain strats are not good. Yes they are, and most statics do them whether for speed kills. But not letting players know especially on PF, while they join with the expectation of farming, is just showing that they don't respect other players.

@the thread which blew up on twitter where, the one guy who complained about why did they use LB because it ruined their parse on a farm pt.
Is a perfect example of it.

Have a good day.

I no longer do EX or savage

but I think the current situation is the best for both, the "keep it to yourself approach"

When it become a tool require for every content, it will no doubt being misuse and toxicity arise, yet, EX and savage require at least some effect and commitment a tool to find where the issue/s are is needed

So the current one eye close one eye open and keep it in hard content like ex/savage/ultimate is the best option

I wish parse pts could advertise being parse parties. As they can't be announced as parse party, we got "barse", "purse", "fun run" etc. If the parse pt can be properly announced, just don't enter this type of party and problem solved

Parsing itself isn't the problem. The issue is toxic players.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Misutoraru

I no longer do EX or savage

but I think the current situation is the best for both, the "keep it to yourself approach"

When it become a tool require for every content, it will no doubt being misuse and toxicity arise, yet, EX and savage require at least some effect and commitment a tool to find where the issue/s are is needed

So the current one eye close one eye open and keep it in hard content like ex/savage/ultimate is the best option

---

I agree. It's the best solution and a good compromise. People can't be trusted with it otherwise and develop this God complex.

I mean the party leader can do whatever they want in terms of how they organise party strats, if they don’t mention they are gonna do a compromising strat for parsing purposes then let them know they need to mention it and leave, if they did mention it and you join the party with the thinking of “parsing is bad” that’s totally on you

Parsing is a totally valid system and it’s not going anywhere

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LewynStoutspirit

Parsing itself isn't the problem. The issue is toxic players.

---

While that is true, you can't parse without players, but you can play without parses. It'll never get implemented for that reason. And the 'don't ask, don't tell' policy has produced enough toxicity. Imagine what it would be like if it were openly endorsed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MorbidMisfortune

Parsing has only been out for a little while and already experiencing a lot of toxic wow-like community behavior about it. Mind you I haven't used it myself but I understand the concept of it, and I've already had a group that was intentionally doing a compromising strat on an EX trial to "pad their parse" and kicking anyone who had an issue with it. Didn't have anything about it in the PF info and got mad that people, who joined to actually complete the duty, had an issue with it. Guess this is what you get with the communities merging.

---

This post is laced with false/misinformation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Payadopa

While that is true, you can't parse without players, but you can play without parses. It'll never get implemented for that reason. And the 'don't ask, don't tell' policy has produced enough toxicity. Imagine what it would be like if it were openly endorsed.

---

Not nearly as bad as a lot of people seem to think.

Any of the overly toxic players would get themselves banned within the first few weeks. Which would be doing everyone a favor if we're being honest. SE isn't going to stop enforcing their ToS policies after all.

Realistically, DPS meters aren't banned due to toxicity but rather to prevent player exclusion. The devs want people to carry bad and less experienced players through content even if said players are hardly contributing. They want you carry that freestyle Samurai who's died twice already or the White Mage who hasn't pressed Glare once. Toxicity, while absolutely a thing, is more the PR statement since coming right out and saying the actual reason wouldn't go over well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Payadopa

While that is true, you can't parse without players, but you can play without parses. It'll never get implemented for that reason. And the 'don't ask, don't tell' policy has produced enough toxicity. Imagine what it would be like if it were openly endorsed.

---

Game would be better

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MorbidMisfortune

Parsing has only been out for a little while and already experiencing a lot of toxic wow-like community behavior about it. Mind you I haven't used it myself but I understand the concept of it, and I've already had a group that was intentionally doing a compromising strat on an EX trial to "pad their parse" and kicking anyone who had an issue with it. Didn't have anything about it in the PF info and got mad that people, who joined to actually complete the duty, had an issue with it. Guess this is what you get with the communities merging.

---

Third party parsing has existed for a decade+. If there are numbers, someone will count them, and someone else will use them enhance their ep to the detriment of more social creatures that have other things of value besides said numbers.

As much as I dont care about the discussion - Fflogs should be a opt-in service and not a register-to-opt-out service. But they probably wouldn't make enough money with ads if only the parsing interested players are on it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Commander_Justitia

As much as I dont care about the discussion - Fflogs should be a opt-in service and not a register-to-opt-out service. But they probably wouldn't make enough money with ads if only the parsing interested players are on it.

---

Wrong, fflogs shouldn't allow opting out, that's the actual issue