The Real Problem with Parsers

[Lyrica_Ashtine]

There's a stark difference between non-content such as dungeons or the normal version of Alexander and going into Savage. In Savage, even with current gear, the DPS need to at least know how to play their class. If they don't, you can - and should - call them on it. Alexander Savage is not designed for the less-hardcore players who "don't try" in things or are simply lolling around having fun. You need to actually play well to clear. That's a situation where you SHOULD mention it. I still tend not to point out the one person specifically, though, I'll mention "the dps is low." And if someone asks, I'll clarify. I can usually tell things like that even without a parser running.

Since you've brought this up:
1) How do you pinpoint where the problem is? You mentioned one good DPS can't carry three. But for certain content, three DPS can't carry even one.
2) How do you plan to prove someone (or two of them) is/are the problem? You mentioned that "you can tell". Exactly how? Enmity bar? The only job out there without an enmity reducer would be monk. Every other DPS job has something that affects enmity. The enmity bar is also rather limited, especially if the main tank's going all in on enmity generation, making other player's enmity bar as large as 5 pixels.*
3) How can other players on DPS roles know they're performing well or not without a parser?
4) If said players are supposed to find a guide to "perform well", what makes that guide credible if no parser is involved during the creation of it?

* Objective answer, "gut feeling" is not a valid answer.

[JackFross]

Okay.

Since you've brought this up:
1) How do you pinpoint where the problem is? You mentioned one good DPS can't carry three. But for certain content, three DPS can't carry even one.

If the problem is in DPS, it's readily apparent by the fact you hit enrage.

2) How do you plan to prove someone (or two of them) is/are the problem? You mentioned that "you can tell". Exactly how? Enmity bar? The only job out there without an enmity reducer would be monk. Every other DPS job has something that affects enmity. The enmity bar is also rather limited, especially if the main tank's going all in on enmity generation, making other player's enmity bar as large as 5 pixels.*

You can tell by certain skill animations being seen or not. I raid with MNK/MCH/SMN. I know what I'm supposed to see on Faust with those three, at least. Generally I'll give it one run where I don't bother paying attention to others. If there's a problem, I'll watch. A bad MNK will sit on one side for far too long; they're clearly missing positionals or even skipping buffs entirely. You can see most of their main ones just in the party list (TwS and FoF) and the dots on the boss itself. SMN and SCH are easy to notice, because there should be 2 instances of each debuff up at all times on the boss. If there aren't, one or both aren't doing their job proper. BLM you have to actually watch the party list, so it's a little more difficult; gotta see Enochian not falling off, see them cycling fire then ice, etc. The rotation is complex, but simple. If Enochian drops off against Faust, they're clearly doing things wrong. It's a dummy. Bards are EASY to tell just by enmity list, as are MCH. Both of them SHOULD crap out INSANE enmity on the opener, even with Quelling Strikes activated - it's why they should be using it.

These are all general "feelings" if you will, but the overall point I was making was more about raid dps and less about individual classes. It's really easy to notice if a boss is dying considerably slowly, when I've done the content to death. I know my rotation. If I'm going for too long, I can tell.

3) How can other players on DPS roles know they're performing well or not without a parser?

That's an issue with the game's design, yes. There's no positive feedback loop for performing well with DPS classes. Yeah, as Machinist, you'll see that HUGE hit on Wildfire or Bard will see that big Empyreal Arrow. Hitting 5k crits on Full Thrust as Dragoon feels SO GOOD. But none of that translates ~at all~ to how you're performing. Everyone can make big hits happen. Very few people can have that carry through an encounter.

I think the game should have personal parsers for Striking Dummies. I definitely definitely think so. In instances, though? If it's anything other than a PERSONAL meter to show YOU how YOU performed in the encounter, I disagree with it. Completely. It's nobody else's business how someone else is doing. It's not your job to tell someone they suck, it's their job to seek help to get better.*

4) If said players are supposed to find a guide to "perform well", what makes that guide credible if no parser is involved during the creation of it?

99% of things in most guides to playing classes can be reasoned out and calculated mathematically given the numbers provided by the game. Optimal rotations can be calculated off potency amounts. Simple testing shows us that potencies are essentially percentages. Your auto attack is ~100 potency if you compare it against your other skills and their potencies. Due to this, you can easily assume that potency directly correlates to damage output. If you produce a rotation that spits out maximum potency per gcd, you've similarly discovered a rotation that spits out maximum damage per gcd.

You don't need a parser to do that math. The only time a parser is really employed is when discerning best in slot sets, since stat weights require rigorous testing to discover damage formulae - and even then the parser is just there to make number gathering a bit easier, I feel. You can similarly just record it and add up all the damage ticks, divide by the time and boom done. It's just more time consuming that way.


I personally created this guide for playing Dragoon a while back without employing a parser in any part of it; it's a result of my own trial and error in playing the class, alongside calculations I made like those I described above (and then a few tips pointed out to me by others that I hadn't discovered yet). Would you say my guide isn't credible?



*//EDIT: That is to say: Once a feedback loop exists where players can see their own personal damage/dps scores in an instance, it's possible to then DISCUSS it with other players. Talking to other players of your class to be like "Hey, I did 700 dps in Alex 1 today. How are you doing?" if the person responds with a higher number, the lower number person can either attribute it to gear or them lacking in certain skills. It opens dialogues about the classes and how to play them in-game without use of third-party programs. THAT is a change I would like to see. I would never want to see it where people start laughing at the poor newbie NIN who is struggling to maintain 600 dps in standstill because of the complicated dance that is their rotation. Once they see that they're doing worse than others of the same class, they can seek to improve. Being TOLD they suck isn't gonna help. It'll just make them feel worse. x:

[Lyrica_Ashtine]

snip

Well, that's quite a wall of text. I'll just respond in a more compact form :P

The problem with your arguments on 1, 2 and 3 would be "feeling", which you admitted to it that it's all "personal feeling". I have my doubts whether observing every single player in the DPS seat, looking at their rotation/animation order, doing your own job while watching the field is... feasible. If anything, it's all "paper chemistry". While it's true on paper, it does not (always) apply in practice. Even if it does, it's only true for a very selective individuals who somehow can keep an eye on the animation (order) of 4 players in addition to their own role while also observing and responding to the playing field.

Here's another thing about "personal feeling"; it's not a valid reason to elaborate why someone's performing poorly. You're all for personal parsers, but here's one flaw in it: It doesn't work or make a difference. This leads to two cases:
Case 1 being denial. If no one has access to your numbers, what is preventing you from hiding it?
Case 2 would be drawing conclusions. If your numbers are fine, there's no reason to hide it. If someone would hide it after all, the logical conclusion would be that their numbers are terrible. (let's just go for pure DPS numbers for now, rather than in depth information like skill rotation)
Ergo: Regardless of a parser being public or private, it would hardly make a difference.

There's a possibility of case 3 where multiple players would hide their data. This would actually be the worst as rather than eliminating the weakest link, the entire group is more likely to break apart and unable to achieve the common goal they have gathered for. Even if majority of the group is perfectly capable.

As for your guide, you mentioned you used "math". I think it's safe to assume you've used a program to help you do that. So how exactly would this be different from parsers? Parsers simply simplify it for this sole reason. It does add one benefit. Namely numbers. Numbers are much easier to grasp for the guide's effectiveness, rather than a "theoretical guide". Without the end result (the numbers), how could you prove your guide's better, if not just as effective, as another guide?

There's one particular thing about the whole personal parser or public parser "discussion". This "fear" without base for being alienated because you're doing poorly. But isn't this exactly what parsers should be for? Improving yourself.

[JackFross]

As for your guide, you mentioned you used "math". I think it's safe to assume you've used a program to help you do that. So how exactly would this be different from parsers? Parsers simply simplify it for this sole reason. It does add one benefit. Namely numbers. Numbers are much easier to grasp for the guide's effectiveness, rather than a "theoretical guide". Without the end result (the numbers), how could you prove your guide's better, if not just as effective, as another guide?

I forgot to address this point. The "program" I used is nothing other than pen-and-paper, automated by just running the calculations in excel rather than doing them by hand. I directly take the potency amounts in-game, use the GCD cooldown I have, and, using these numbers, calculated what would be the optimal rotation between a few different variants I came up with. Dragoon is simple in that it has 2 combos and 2 skills out-of-combo that are halfway useful. (Full Thrust/Chaos Thrust and Heavy Thrust/Phlebotomize, respectfully)

I reasoned out that Fracture is a waste of time and TP, because its potency per gcd is less than every other potential skill you could put in that spot (listed above) - INCLUDING Heavy Thrust, when you add up all those 15%'s that it gives on any of the other GCDs.

None of this required parsing - none even required verification by parsing. Numbers don't lie. Using simply the potency amounts, I also was able to calculate when it would be optimal to use buffs such as Life Surge, simply by mathing it out hard enough. I didn't have to parse using it in each place in a long fight to see. I just extrapolated using "perfect" rotations with "ideal" timings and decided which skills it would be useful to use it on. It was a loss to use it for Chaos Thrust (where it used to be a gain) but a gain to use it on either 4th hit OR Full Thrust, so long as you hit the positionals.

All of this has merit regardless of parsing or not, because I considered all other cases. At least 90% of other cases are thrown out before you even start because 90% of the skills on Dragoon are less potency per gcd than using either of those 4 blocks described above. From there it's just a matter of figuring out how to maximize the use of those 4 blocks. There's only so many permutations that exist when you only have 4 pieces to slide around, especially when 2 out of 4 of those are static damage regardless where you put them.


All of this described above comes with numbers.
Heavy Thrust is 170 potency per gcd, not counting buffs.
Phlebotomize is 170+30x? potency per gcd, not counting buffs.
Chaos Thrust combo is (180+220+250+290+35x?)/4 potency per gcd, not counting buffs.
Full Thrust combo is (150+200+360+290)/4 potency per gcd, not counting buffs.

The ?'s depend on your skill speed and the rotation you end up putting together.

In practice, we can calculate the Full Thrust combo's potency, including our base buffs as Dragoon (Heavy Thrust's +15% damage and Disembowel's 10% Pierce debuff resist drop):

150+200+360+290 = 1000 potency
1000 / 4 = 250 potency per gcd
250 x 1.15 = 287.5 potency per gcd (with Heavy Thrust)
287.5 / 0.9 = 319.44 potency per gcd (with HT+Dis)

That's a number I can compare to the others and see which combo is stronger. I didn't use a parser to get that number at all. All I "automated" was the last two calculations.

When you set up a rotation, it will give you a specific potency per gcd. You can compare these numbers to the numbers produced by other rotations to find out which one is strictly best without doing the fieldwork of testing each one a hundred times and averaging the results to give dps numbers spat out from a parser that estimates dot ticks.

How is it different from a parser? It's calculated using nothing but the numbers the game gives me in tool tips without "automating" anything aside from flat calculations (Though a calculator hardly automates anything). A parser scrapes the data from the game and compiles it, automating everything from data gathering to the calculations of damage amounts. These are two very different methods, though they look similar if you paint in broad strokes.

[Malevicton]

snip

Calculating your optimal potencies shows you your hypothetical ceiling. If you wanna know how well you're actually applying that knowledge then you need to analyze your combat logs.

[JackFross]

Calculating your optimal potencies shows you your hypothetical ceiling. If you wanna know how well you're actually applying that knowledge then you need to analyze your combat logs.

Sure. That's correct, to some extent.

However, once you have the base rotation and understand the base mechanics of the class, you've reached the skill floor. In general, someone at the skill floor isn't going to be noticed as being "bad," even with parsers. The skill gap is immense for most classes, and I can only speak for Dragoon on this, but...

If you just do the base rotation of Dragoon with absolutely no buffs (even ignoring GSK), I can still cruise at ~960 dps on a dummy. This compares to my 1350+ resting dps on dummy using buffs and ogcd attacks. If that 1350 translates to 1100-1200 in any given turn of Alexander normal mode, the minimum skill variant I outlined here would likely translate to ~815 dps. Granted, I'm i203, so my stats are quite higher/better than, say, an i180 player, but these numbers should still hold (somewhat) for someone who's been buying Eso gear weekly and has the rest 190. They'll be ~100 or so less, but meh. Same story as below.

No one will call him on his shit. It's low, yeah, but nobody is gonna say "BRO U SUCK" they'll just shrug it off and move on. And that's simply doing mechanics correctly and performing your base rotation while using literally 0 cooldowns for the entire duration. Nothing. No jumps, no Geirskoguls, no Life Surge, not even a Blood for Blood.


Basically, the mathematics I'm talking about isn't related to calculating a hypothetical skill ceiling, it's about calculating the very real skill FLOOR for a class. The base rotation you should be doing to perform the class correctly. So, uh, essentially - you don't need a parser to tell you that you're playing your class according to how the current meta tells you the optimal way to play it is. You'd need one to see yourself IMPROVE beyond the baseline, sure, but to know you're there? Not necessary, imo.

[Viridiana]

In practice, we can calculate the Full Thrust combo's potency, including our base buffs as Dragoon (Heavy Thrust's +15% damage and Disembowel's 10% Pierce debuff resist drop):

150+200+360+290 = 1000 potency
1000 / 4 = 250 potency per gcd
250 x 1.15 = 287.5 potency per gcd (with Heavy Thrust)
287.5 / 0.9 = 319.44 potency per gcd (with HT+Dis)

And then you get in game and realize that your calculations are off, because 1) potency scales weird and Full Thrust isn't 12x as much damage as Phlebotomize ticks, even without buffs, and 2) that Disembowel should probably be X*1.1, not X/.9. At least, that's what the community's been using.

[JackFross]

And then you get in game and realize that your calculations are off, because 1) potency scales weird and Full Thrust isn't 12x as much damage as Phlebotomize ticks, even without buffs, and 2) that Disembowel should probably be X*1.1, not X/.9. At least, that's what the community's been using.

I dunno what numbers you're looking at, but the ratio of Full Thrust to Phlebotomize ticks is ~12x in-game. If you're comparing HT+Dis Full Thrust v HT+Dis Phleb, then the difference will be larger, since the Phleb dot ticks aren't piercing damage and thus aren't boosted by Disembowel. Potency scales perfectly linearly. There's RNG, of course, but the ratios are consistent, according to potency amounts. You also still don't need a parser to see these relationships. I sure didn't use one to test it out and figure out that potencies scale linearly with damage. (Since I was playing on PS3 when I did these initial calculations back in 2.0-2.1)

It should be /.9, if the game works the way the tooltip explains. It decreases piercing resistance by 10%, it doesn't increase piercing damage by 10%. These are different statements. Just because other people do it one way doesn't necessarily make it correct.

For the record:
x1.1 = x11/10
/0.9 = x10/9

Those numbers are different by 1/90. Doesn't really make much difference, except that dividing by the 0.9 is more accurate, assuming the game works the way it states in the tooltip.


This is getting a bit off-topic. The point still stands I didn't use or need a parser to calculate the numbers that give you an optimal rotation for Dragoon and Paladin. I haven't bothered looking into other classes yet, since those are my only two 60s, so no other ones matter to me at the moment. You don't need a parser to discover the skill floor for your class. You do need one to see how you're progressing toward the skill ceiling. It's really really obvious if a player isn't at the skill floor yet for Dragoon, at least to my eyes and ears. I've been playing the class since 2.0 beta phase 4. I know the sound effects and animations for all the pre-heavensward skills like the back of my hand. If someone isn't reaching that baseline plateau it is *painfully* obvious to me.

And if someone is at or above the skill floor, there's no real reason to be a dick to them, because at least they're playing "properly." If they're below, that's cause for you to offer constructive criticism and back down if they get offended.

The problem isn't parsers being illegal, it's players being too pigheaded to admit that they're doing something wrong. Hell, I've even had players respond with "So? We still cleared." after I tried to offer advice on how they could play Dragoon better because they were dealing about 50% of their potential. Maybe that would be fixed if they could see their numbers. Who knows?

[Viridiana]

Potency scales perfectly linearly.

Hahahahahaha...No. No it doesn't. Except when it does, sometimes. But usually it doesn't.

For the record:
x1.1 = x11/10
/0.9 = x10/9

Those numbers are different by 1/90. Doesn't really make much difference, except that dividing by the 0.9 is more accurate, assuming the game works the way it states in the tooltip.

And the former is what all the guides go with, and is probably more accurate. And a difference of 1/90 will start giving you wrong numbers as soon as your damage exceeds 90 points, which was forever ago. Once you're up past 900 damage abilities, you're looking at 10 points off from expected value.