Absolute frustration at not being able to see my own DPS (ps4)

[UBERHAXED]

Others have given comparable examples of how this works but since you asked me I'll answer as well.

A parser giving you a 1245 will not tell you to when use BoTD by itself, in fact nobody would look at it that way anyway as that's a prime example of not correctly reading the information.

There's a large difference between doing the calculations when it comes to the potency of skills etc to create the perfect rotation before hand, practicing it ad nauseam on a striking dummy and then actually performing the rotation successfully in live content with the variables that are boss moves and other party members.

When players use the term "improving their rotation" they don't mean that the parser is suddenly going to start spitting out increased damage and adding chunks of DPS, they also don't mean it's going to provide a brand new step by step rotation that couldn't have been done on paper prior to the fight.

What they do mean however is that a person parsing their performance in live content can look at other examples to get an idea of how well they should be performing in a fight and contrary to what you may believe there are many players out there that simply do not know this.

Your example with the two Dragoons doesn't really make any sense in the context of this conversation.

Saying "well this Dragoon did 1300 DPS why didn't you!!!!??" is not the same as someone asking "Can someone tell me what the average DPS of a DRG in this fight is around my ilvl and stats? I'd like to know how much i should be doing." this is where someone can respond with "Well the average burst assuming you're doing your rotation right is usually around 1300-1400 DPS in the first phase give or take with a sustained afterwards of around 1000-1200-ish for the rest of the fight but various factors can change that obviously" this gives that Dragoon something to shoot for when evaluating their own performance.

If That DRG looks at the parser and sees they're only doing 800 burst at the start and start dropping down to 600 sustained they obviously know they are doing something incorrectly but they may have to look at and evaluate their performance to see where they went wrong. Maybe they weren't mechanically fast enough? Maybe they need to adjust their positioning and the way they avoid boss telegraphs in order to maximize their DPS up-time which should be common sense but you'd be surprised how many players don't realize how much stepping away from the boss for an extra GCD or not dodging properly can impact their DPS, they may think it's just 20 points here and there when in reality you could end up dropping a few hundred points instead, which doesn't sound like much until it keeps happening over time and you wipe at 1%, a parser will show you this when you compare the data from multiple attempts.

As for things like BoTD, GL, etc that yes should have 100% up-time, historically there have been many cases of a party doing either too much or two little DPS causing awkward phase transitions where it falls off. It's not about when you activate it but entirely about where you might have to alter your rotation to extend it, the number of times I've heard "Damn i lost GL, Enochian, BoTD, etc" because of an awkward phase are too numerous to count over two years of content ranging from Ex primals that are notorious for lots of jumps when pushed (see: Leviathan, Ifrit, Titan, Garuda) or bosses that you need to come near full stop on DPS so that you don't wipe the party (Melusine, Nael, Bahamut) a parser doesn't change the math in any way, but it does show you your performance counting the variable that is live play.

Why do you need to know (example here) that you are performing below the average dragoon by 300 dps before (completely arbitrary value) you decide you need to play correctly. If you are playing at 100%, not missing any GCD or positionals and performing the standard burst at the dps check, then there is NOTHING you can do to improve your DPS, other than rely on random variables. If you know you are not playing at 100% (that is, you are missing some GCDs, your cooldowns were not aligned for the dps check, you missed positionals) then you already know, without seeing any value that you are performing subpar and you can improve.
(Example incoming)
It's like saying that if you miss bunch of positionals (due to tack positioning) in equal concentration it's okay if you are only "30 DPS" below the average. But what if the average Dragoon also doesn't clear the fight, due to them not being good players (not exactly a stretch here). All of the slower groups who don't form their strategy uses the same meta strategy and positions the boss in the same terrible way because they saw some guide video of doing it that way.

But instead of actually solving the problem (telling your tank that the boss positioning needs to change, regardless of how they saw the tank do it on the video so you can do your positionals) you are content because you are only 2% behind the average. you knew for a fact that you can easily improve your dps by doing something so fundamental, but were willing to accept being subpar is okay as long as everyone is also subpar. This reasoning is why there is a large gap between the average player, and player who have cleared the raid tier. And guess what? If you want a parser, it's probably because you intend on clearing the raid tier.

The fact that you were doing 300 behind average even if your rotation was optimal (as in, your damage cannot improve) might stem from the fact that you were using a 170 weapon. The parser will say the same thing, but you will now ask around what other dragoons do instead of seeing, "Obviously, this is already striking dummy burst rotation. It can't be improved mathematically, it must be the 10 points of weapon damage I am missing". If you're not doing perfect striking dummy burst rotation, then you already know (without a parser) that you can improve your DPS and exactly how to improve your DPS.
(Example based on example incoming)
It's like saying you are taking an engineering class of 300 people.
->
The average grade is a C and your grade is a C. You then come to the conclusion that your are doing it right.
->
The average grade is a D and your grade is a C. You then come to the conclusion that you are doing it right and also don't need to work any harder because you are already better than average.
->The average is a B and your grade is a C. You then come to the conclusion that you should should spend another hour a week to review your notes before exams because you are slightly below average.

The issue is that none of these scenarios are correct. Knowledge of what others are doing should not have influenced your decisions to do better or not do better. If your grade was a C you know from the start that you need to improve because you haven't hit the maximum (A+). Similarly, Even if you didn't have knowledge of the numerical value of your grade, you know that you missed some test questions and you can always improve until thew point that you have perfect accuracy on every topic.

Funny that you say this, because we don't rely entirely on the math when building things like spaceships we extensively test and re-test every single part down to the bolt before we conduct a launch and even then there are times when we get it wrong or something happens that we cannot foresee that wasn't taken into account. It could be as simple as human error or something entirely beyond the scope of our predictions, you can look up the space shuttle challenger and see how even though everything in the math was probably correct a simple O-ring malfunction can cause disastrous results that defied their predictions and nobody saw coming, sure we know exactly what happened now, but that's because we were able to asses and analyze the data after the fact.

Additionally while we might not reinvent the wheel, we've surely innovated it about a billion (not an actual number) times to suit our various needs, from the materials we construct it with to altering it's form, changing things from the draft board in response to live feedback is exactly how we make progress.

The amount of misinformation is disturbing. The challenger had a defect that was known to occur ahead of time due to weather conditions (physics at play here). The shuttle was launched due to scheduling constraints, leading to the situation that it had to be launched that day, or some time in the following year. This was a classic example of management ignoring engineering information that was known as result of equations beforehand before the launch. If nothing else, this further augments the point. "Well, the math could be wrong and the seal on the rings don't break" was the "flawed" argument here. It would be in your best interest not to discuss what you have not clue about.

[TaranTatsuuchi]

A lot of the opposition I see at the moment is because a handful of people fear parsers and so based on that alone everyone playing on a console should be held back regardless of wanting a simple addition to the game. I would like to add in my fears and receive the support of the community also. I have a fear of any new classes being added to the game in future as I believe that playing those classes could lead to harassment from people saying the new classes suck, which would in turn lead to me being excluded from groups.

There is evidence to support the idea that playing a new class could lead to being removed from groups and harassment, just look at Machinist during the time of Bismarck Ex where some people misjudged the class and treated those who played it unfairly. My fear should be taken seriously, and as such I ask that no new classes be added to the game ever again unless you play on PC and have access to add ons, the addition of new classes via that means will have no impact on me as they aren't "official".

The above may sound irrational to some, there may be evidence to suggest that playing new classes doesn't lead to harassment, but I know deep down that my fears are true and I will continue to ignore all evidence to the contrary. Thank you for your support.

Can we get dancer first?

[Avidria]

The challenger had a defect that was known to occur ahead of time due to weather conditions (physics at play here). The shuttle was launched due to scheduling constraints, leading to the situation that it had to be launched that day, or some time in the following year. This was a classic example of management ignoring engineering information that was known as result of equations beforehand before the launch.

It wasn't just math and equations that told engineers that the o rings could fail at low temperatures. They also had examples of previous flights and actual physical evidence of erosion in the rings at low temperatures, below which they didn't have the data to be sure of what would happen. Management didn't just ignore the math, they also ignored the evidence that supported it-for various reasons, including pressure to launch since the launch had already been delayed several times. The whole thing was a mess.

[Ryel]

Why do you need to know (example here) that you are performing below the average dragoon by 300 dps before (completely arbitrary value) you decide you need to play correctly. If you are playing at 100%, not missing any GCD or positionals and performing the standard burst at the dps check, then there is NOTHING you can do to improve your DPS, other than rely on random variables. If you know you are not playing at 100% (that is, you are missing some GCDs, your cooldowns were not aligned for the dps check, you missed positionals) then you already know, without seeing any value that you are performing subpar and you can improve.
(Example incoming)

It's like saying that if you miss bunch of positionals (due to tack positioning) in equal concentration it's okay if you are only "30 DPS" below the average. But what if the average Dragoon also doesn't clear the fight, due to them not being good players (not exactly a stretch here). All of the slower groups who don't form their strategy uses the same meta strategy and positions the boss in the same terrible way because they saw some guide video of doing it that way.

I think this is where you're misunderstanding.

In this example it's not a matter of the player making a conscious choice to play below the average Dragoon by 300 DPS it's the fact that they may not be fully aware they are doing so and the comparison by parser begins to illuminate any issues with their play. The issue is what the player believes to be their 100% might turn out isn't the case, that they weren't aware they were having issues or making mistakes.

Stop me if you've heard this one before: "Oh man, I thought my DPS should have been higher than that, I know I can do better than the last run, let's run it again!"

Seeing tangible feedback allows a player to evaluate themselves in an effort to improve, nobody is saying the parser is going to do the work for you but it will show you the results of the current attempt. If it was the case that every single player had full awareness of their mechanics executions and rotations on equal grounds and equal fields there would be very few poor players across the board, however this has proven to be not the case. This concept isn't even exclusive to the game it applies to everything.

in fact we have multiple sayings for it:

"Practice makes perfect"
"If at first you don't succeed, try again"

Getting feedback on how your rotation actually handles in live content versus the vacuum of a dummy parse is the only data that actually matters, because it's when it counts. You must have seen various comments in the DPS forums / reddit / anywhere of players asking others how they've gotten certain results or seen videos of people showing off opening rotations, speed kills etc because actual player skill is a factor not just the rotation on it's own.

Parse results are key feedback when it comes to refining your skill.

But instead of actually solving the problem (telling your tank that the boss positioning needs to change, regardless of how they saw the tank do it on the video so you can do your positionals) you are content because you are only 2% behind the average. you knew for a fact that you can easily improve your dps by doing something so fundamental, but were willing to accept being subpar is okay as long as everyone is also subpar. This reasoning is why there is a large gap between the average player, and player who have cleared the raid tier. And guess what? If you want a parser, it's probably because you intend on clearing the raid tier.

Nobody said this wasn't part of it, it's not like people are saying you'll look at parse results and instantly become a top tier player and never have to communicate with your party.

A lot of this conversation actually takes place when the party looks at the parser after a failed DPS check, sees they might need to squeeze in some more DPS in various areas and says:

"Okay guys what can we do here?"

This is usually followed by an analysis of what can be changed on everyone's end, things like: Where can a healer get in some more damage? What can the tanks do to help the DPS? etc etc

Party assessment has to start somewhere, having tangible results you can point to and say "we did this well versus this well" is a good starting point for improvement.

The fact that you were doing 300 behind average even if your rotation was optimal (as in, your damage cannot improve) might stem from the fact that you were using a 170 weapon. The parser will say the same thing, but you will now ask around what other dragoons do instead of seeing, "Obviously, this is already striking dummy burst rotation. It can't be improved mathematically, it must be the 10 points of weapon damage I am missing". If you're not doing perfect striking dummy burst rotation, then you already know (without a parser) that you can improve your DPS and exactly how to improve your DPS.
(Example based on example incoming)
It's like saying you are taking an engineering class of 300 people.
->
The average grade is a C and your grade is a C. You then come to the conclusion that your are doing it right.
->
The average grade is a D and your grade is a C. You then come to the conclusion that you are doing it right and also don't need to work any harder because you are already better than average.
->The average is a B and your grade is a C. You then come to the conclusion that you should should spend another hour a week to review your notes before exams because you are slightly below average.

The issue is that none of these scenarios are correct. Knowledge of what others are doing should not have influenced your decisions to do better or not do better. If your grade was a C you know from the start that you need to improve because you haven't hit the maximum (A+). Similarly, Even if you didn't have knowledge of the numerical value of your grade, you know that you missed some test questions and you can always improve until thew point that you have perfect accuracy on every topic.

These are all things you evaluate and assess based on feedback.

No offense but you make comments that lead me to wonder if you've ever interacted with another person and i don't mean that as an insult.

Are you saying you've never come across a situation where one or a number of people were inspired or encouraged to perform better based on the results of their peers? You've never seen someone look at the class average of test results and think "man next time i want to get an A instead of the average of a C" while some are perfectly happy thinking "well everyone else got a C so i guess I'm not doing all that bad, so why bother trying any harder?"

In the case of a lack of a parser it's like taking a test with 300 people and instead of getting a grade back at all the professor just stands up and says "You all passed" or "Most of you passed, some of you failed, but I'm passing the entire class anyway because the majority of you did well enough that i don't care about the rest" it's like "Okay, well that's great and all but, I'd really like to know how i did on the test"

Of course this whole testing analogy is terrible to begin with because tests normally aren't dynamic and don't change questions during the exam nor are they effected by the actions or lack of actions of other people taking the test at the same time, that and when it comes to mathematics there usually isn't a physical component involved in taking a test (rotation, practice, etc).

However it's like you're trying to remove factors like motivation, practice, and a desire for improvement from the conversation as if they aren't very real reasons as to why some players get better and others don't. Regardless of your personal feelings on the matter, the evidence (see: human history) speaks otherwise.

There are plenty of people who should be better at things that they do but they aren't, there are other people who get better at things when they have a form of measurement placed in front of them showing how well they should be doing and use it as a basis for improvement.

The argument isn't about improving the mathematics it's about improving the execution, which in turn is rewarded with better results.

The amount of misinformation is disturbing. The challenger had a defect that was known to occur ahead of time due to weather conditions (physics at play here). The shuttle was launched due to scheduling constraints, leading to the situation that it had to be launched that day, or some time in the following year. This was a classic example of management ignoring engineering information that was known as result of equations beforehand before the launch. If nothing else, this further augments the point. "Well, the math could be wrong and the seal on the rings don't break" was the "flawed" argument here. It would be in your best interest not to discuss what you have not clue about.

Don't want to delve too deep into the challenger thing but the point wasn't to disprove the mathematics, but to illustrate there are factors beyond them.

When i say nobody saw it (a malfunction) coming i mean nobody saw the scope of the disaster coming. "This launch might backfire" and "Everyone on board is going to die" are two very different things.

Were there reports since the 70's of the O-ring flaws and the lack of data for various temperature ratings as well as the fact that this known issue hadn't been resolved? Yep.

Were there multiple warnings from the engineers that something could possibly go wrong and they weren't 100% on whether the launch would have gone as expected, with in fact data saying it might not at all? Yep.

Did the higher-ups ignore or not receive this feedback at all this based on a combination of launch scheduling and others feeling they were safe enough to do so anyway? Yep.

And did it quite literally explode in their faces? Oh yeah.

Had they known for 100% what the results would have been would they have done it anyway? /shrug who knows?

My point primarily is that while a rotation says you should be performing in one way (with a degree of variance) a player's skill and practice comes in to play when seeing if these results line up.

I'm also not entirely sure why you seem so hostile over this either.

[ShanaShirayuki]

I'm also not entirely sure why you seem so hostile over this either.

Because it seems he can't get his point across without insulting someone's knowledge or intelligence. Aka, he's trolling.

[TaranTatsuuchi]

I've never really been particularly interested in this subject much, but I've lurked in a few threads on various sites on the subject.
I've read the entire thread. (Apart from two pages that were supposedly deleted? I missed the fun!)


The more I read on this subject, the more I believe we need parsers.

[RinaVrinn]

I'm all for a personal parser, as information on how to improve your numbers can be found by looking, but I do think a group parser can work if set to a certain limit.

Basically a group parser that shows everyone's DPS, but only to a certain threshold. And that threshold is set by the devs on what they think is an acceptable number needed to clear an instance within a time limit of say 20-25mins. However, to you, it will show your personal number, even passed the threshold. Then it will still have a numbering system, so you could be at number 1 DPS, but to everyone else it will still only show the maximum threshold number but you will be number 1.

In a raid environment, you could potentially set it to show everyone's numbers, but only in a preformed party, like how the loot rules setting works. But anything that used via DF gets set to the standard like I explained above. Will there still be abuse? Probably, however you don't really have an excuse if it's a number SE at least expects players to be able to reach.

[UBERHAXED]

I think this is where you're misunderstanding.
In this example it's not a matter of the player making a conscious choice to play below the average Dragoon by 300 DPS it's the fact that they may not be fully aware they are doing so and the comparison by parser begins to illuminate any issues with their play. The issue is what the player believes to be their 100% might turn out isn't the case, that they weren't aware they were having issues or making mistakes.

Stop me if you've heard this one before: "Oh man, I thought my DPS should have been higher than that, I know I can do better than the last run, let's run it again!"

Seeing tangible feedback allows a player to evaluate themselves in an effort to improve, nobody is saying the parser is going to do the work for you but it will show you the results of the current attempt. If it was the case that every single player had full awareness of their mechanics executions and rotations on equal grounds and equal fields there would be very few poor players across the board, however this has proven to be not the case. This concept isn't even exclusive to the game it applies to everything.

in fact we have multiple sayings for it:

"Practice makes perfect"
"If at first you don't succeed, try again"

Getting feedback on how your rotation actually handles in live content versus the vacuum of a dummy parse is the only data that actually matters, because it's when it counts. You must have seen various comments in the DPS forums / reddit / anywhere of players asking others how they've gotten certain results or seen videos of people showing off opening rotations, speed kills etc because actual player skill is a factor not just the rotation on it's own.

Parse results are key feedback when it comes to refining your skill.



Nobody said this wasn't part of it, it's not like people are saying you'll look at parse results and instantly become a top tier player and never have to communicate with your party.

A lot of this conversation actually takes place when the party looks at the parser after a failed DPS check, sees they might need to squeeze in some more DPS in various areas and says:

"Okay guys what can we do here?"

This is usually followed by an analysis of what can be changed on everyone's end, things like: Where can a healer get in some more damage? What can the tanks do to help the DPS? etc etc

Party assessment has to start somewhere, having tangible results you can point to and say "we did this well versus this well" is a good starting point for improvement.



These are all things you evaluate and assess based on feedback.

No offense but you make comments that lead me to wonder if you've ever interacted with another person and i don't mean that as an insult.

Are you saying you've never come across a situation where one or a number of people were inspired or encouraged to perform better based on the results of their peers? You've never seen someone look at the class average of test results and think "man next time i want to get an A instead of the average of a C" while some are perfectly happy thinking "well everyone else got a C so i guess I'm not doing all that bad, so why bother trying any harder?"

In the case of a lack of a parser it's like taking a test with 300 people and instead of getting a grade back at all the professor just stands up and says "You all passed" or "Most of you passed, some of you failed, but I'm passing the entire class anyway because the majority of you did well enough that i don't care about the rest" it's like "Okay, well that's great and all but, I'd really like to know how i did on the test"

Of course this whole testing analogy is terrible to begin with because tests normally aren't dynamic and don't change questions during the exam nor are they effected by the actions or lack of actions of other people taking the test at the same time, that and when it comes to mathematics there usually isn't a physical component involved in taking a test (rotation, practice, etc).

However it's like you're trying to remove factors like motivation, practice, and a desire for improvement from the conversation as if they aren't very real reasons as to why some players get better and others don't. Regardless of your personal feelings on the matter, the evidence (see: human history) speaks otherwise.

There are plenty of people who should be better at things that they do but they aren't, there are other people who get better at things when they have a form of measurement placed in front of them showing how well they should be doing and use it as a basis for improvement.

The argument isn't about improving the mathematics it's about improving the execution, which in turn is rewarded with better results.



Don't want to delve too deep into the challenger thing but the point wasn't to disprove the mathematics, but to illustrate there are factors beyond them.

When i say nobody saw it (a malfunction) coming i mean nobody saw the scope of the disaster coming. "This launch might backfire" and "Everyone on board is going to die" are two very different things.

Were there reports since the 70's of the O-ring flaws and the lack of data for various temperature ratings as well as the fact that this known issue hadn't been resolved? Yep.

Were there multiple warnings from the engineers that something could possibly go wrong and they weren't 100% on whether the launch would have gone as expected, with in fact data saying it might not at all? Yep.

Did the higher-ups ignore or not receive this feedback at all this based on a combination of launch scheduling and others feeling they were safe enough to do so anyway? Yep.

And did it quite literally explode in their faces? Oh yeah.

Had they known for 100% what the results would have been would they have done it anyway? /shrug who knows?

My point primarily is that while a rotation says you should be performing in one way (with a degree of variance) a player's skill and practice comes in to play when seeing if these results line up.

I'm also not entirely sure why you seem so hostile over this either.

Self awareness and raid awareness are required skills for raiding. The discussing of parsers outside of a raid environment makes no sense. We assume that anyone who would benefit from using a parser has the minimum requirements. Adding a parser to the game will not add any more people that would not have raided otherwise. Anyone who would use a parser for a raid thus already knows how to play their class, had self awareness and raid awareness. There simply isn't a such thing as a person (i.e. who raids) who isn't aware that they are making mistakes. If they do, then they do not belong in a group which depends on them to do their job.

That aside...
It will help you if you actually quote the proverb correctly. It's not "practice makes perfect". It's "practice makes permanent". There also is no raid in the game that doesn't operate on a script. That means that there will be no variation from fight to fight aside from who gets targeted by AOEs or mechanics or spawn location of adds or mechanics. And even those are not random, just chosen out of a possible set of configurations (such as laser positions, knight positions, add positions in AS3). When you go into a fight recognizing that it a dummy until mechanics appear, then you will realize that you will perform the same rotation as you do on the dummy, or at least, that is the goal.

Now instead of going off topic with talks about space shuttles (I gave the example as a proof of concept for physics, not sure why it diverged) I'll one again make a few points clear. A parser will not tell you what you are doing wrong. A parser will not tell you why your dps is different from the next guy's. Do you honestly think that top groups think that when they went to AS3 the first week that there was something wrong with their rotations and if they just try stuff out side of the optimal rotation they will get higher dps? No. They knew that they were already doing optimal rotations and didn't meet the dps check. So they needed gear. No coincidence that there were no clears of AS3 until people could buy Esoteric weapons.

But here's the surprise. They didn't need the parser to tell them they weren't passing the dps check. The only use of the parser in their fights was just to check if they were missing (dubious, you can see if you are missing by looking at the screen). After they passed the accuracy cap, then they treat every fight like a dummy, where you pause to do mechanics. Parsers aren't meant to be used by people going into dungeons, or trials, or anything of that nature. Parser only have a place in raids, where people of self awareness, who already know the fundamentals of the game, need to know the accuracy caps of fights. Then they use the data to tell others, "hey here's the cap and here's our clear time and raid dps".

And no, you don't need a parser to determine the raid dps required to pass fights. You just divide the Boss's HP (summed with add's HP) by the enrage time (or mechanic timer). Then, before you even go in the fight, you have your dummy DPS for your party and will know if you will pass the fight based on your gear. And fight's aren't tuned with healer DPS so that's all extra.

There aren't any mechanics in the current raid tier which require you do do anything except move or attack. So to maximize your dps for every encounter, you just have to move when you need to (for movement mechanics) and attack nearly 100% of the time. If you are doing this, then there's nothing a parser can do to help you because you are already doing the maximum capabilities of the class. If you are not, then parser will not help you either. You already know what you need to do before reading how poorly you did. If each player just plays each fight like they are racing for world first clears, then you will realize that each player will always do the maximum possible.

On the other hand, there are people who claim the parser can help with rotations. Knowing how to play your class is the minimum requirement to raid. There is no one raiding who doesn't know their optimal rotation. The parser is not for this group of people. You don't learn your optimal rotation by using a parser either. You either do the work yourself or read someone else's work for "highest mathematically possible PPS rotation". Then you whack a dummy to see if you can do it. If you realize you are making mistakes, then you fix them. If you can't do it (physically), then you should evaluate yourself and decide whether you should play in a group environment. And in both cases, you didn't need a parser.

I'm pro-parser btw, but I don't support reasons that are completely wrong.

[Ryel]

Self awareness and raid awareness are required skills for raiding. The discussing of parsers outside of a raid environment makes no sense. We assume that anyone who would benefit from using a parser has the minimum requirements. Adding a parser to the game will not add any more people that would not have raided otherwise. Anyone who would use a parser for a raid thus already knows how to play their class, had self awareness and raid awareness. There simply isn't a such thing as a person (i.e. who raids) who isn't aware that they are making mistakes. If they do, then they do not belong in a group which depends on them to do their job.

I disagree with the majority of this statement even if I'm aware of what you're trying to say.

Assuming anything about the skill level of the playerbase let alone anyone who actually raids is a recipe for disaster, it also discounts what motivates and helps various players learn.

This has been stated before but it might come as a surprise to you that there are many players who simply are unaware of how well they are or aren't performing and this goes both ways. There are plenty of players who lack the confidence to enter a raid because they think they are bad only to discover otherwise when shown tangible feedback (like a parse result) that they are better than they think they are and the results give them the confidence to attempt finding a raid group.

It has to start somewhere.

Like in a thread where a Ps4 player is asking for a personal parser so that they can improve.

Also I don't think it's ever been stated that adding a parser is suddenly going to add tons of capable players to the raid scene, but it might change the minds of a few that are on the fence, when they see their results. Likewise it might encourage others to practice a bit more if they find out they aren't as good as they think they are.

That aside...
It will help you if you actually quote the proverb correctly. It's not "practice makes perfect". It's "practice makes permanent". There also is no raid in the game that doesn't operate on a script. That means that there will be no variation from fight to fight aside from who gets targeted by AOEs or mechanics or spawn location of adds or mechanics. And even those are not random, just chosen out of a possible set of configurations (such as laser positions, knight positions, add positions in AS3). When you go into a fight recognizing that it a dummy until mechanics appear, then you will realize that you will perform the same rotation as you do on the dummy, or at least, that is the goal.

No, I'm pretty sure i quoted it correctly:

Practice (learning method)

language; like many other things evolves with time, if you only go by the origin of an idiom you are going to be left behind when it comes to modern day vernacular.

On to the point however, while the script of a fight itself doesn't change the actions of the players in the fight may. This has been illustrated by more than a few posters when it comes to things like phase pushes etc.

I don't think it's necessary for me to touch on this again when many others have already done so sufficiently.

Now instead of going off topic with talks about space shuttles (I gave the example as a proof of concept for physics, not sure why it diverged) I'll one again make a few points clear. A parser will not tell you what you are doing wrong. A parser will not tell you why your dps is different from the next guy's. Do you honestly think that top groups think that when they went to AS3 the first week that there was something wrong with their rotations and if they just try stuff out side of the optimal rotation they will get higher dps? No. They knew that they were already doing optimal rotations and didn't meet the dps check. So they needed gear. No coincidence that there were no clears of AS3 until people could buy Esoteric weapons.

But here's the surprise. They didn't need the parser to tell them they weren't passing the dps check. The only use of the parser in their fights was just to check if they were missing (dubious, you can see if you are missing by looking at the screen). After they passed the accuracy cap, then they treat every fight like a dummy, where you pause to do mechanics. Parsers aren't meant to be used by people going into dungeons, or trials, or anything of that nature. Parser only have a place in raids, where people of self awareness, who already know the fundamentals of the game, need to know the accuracy caps of fights. Then they use the data to tell others, "hey here's the cap and here's our clear time and raid dps".

And no, you don't need a parser to determine the raid dps required to pass fights. You just divide the Boss's HP (summed with add's HP) by the enrage time (or mechanic timer). Then, before you even go in the fight, you have your dummy DPS for your party and will know if you will pass the fight based on your gear. And fight's aren't tuned with healer DPS so that's all extra.

It's almost as if a parser were a tool that displays data and feedback that can be used and interpreted in various ways for evaluation based on the needs and the skill level of the group using it, additionally it's almost as if different groups have various ways of approaching and learning content perhaps based on the fact that there are various players with differing ability levels, motivations, and schools of thought.

I would not compare the practices and methodology of a world first raid group to a fresh group of new raiders starting right now that needs to use youtube guides, spreadsheets, and power point presentations as they learn and attempt raid content. I also use the term "need" loosely as the group is likely capable of learning and completing the fight without those aids but if they choose to use them and find a benefit in doing so it's not really the place of myself or anyone else to tell them otherwise.

If it works for them, it works for them much like the data a party receives and interprets from a parser.

It's like saying just because you can do the math by hand means that nobody ever should have to use a calculator, it just doesn't follow.

There aren't any mechanics in the current raid tier which require you do do anything except move or attack. So to maximize your dps for every encounter, you just have to move when you need to (for movement mechanics) and attack nearly 100% of the time. If you are doing this, then there's nothing a parser can do to help you because you are already doing the maximum capabilities of the class. If you are not, then parser will not help you either. You already know what you need to do before reading how poorly you did. If each player just plays each fight like they are racing for world first clears, then you will realize that each player will always do the maximum possible.

On the other hand, there are people who claim the parser can help with rotations. Knowing how to play your class is the minimum requirement to raid. There is no one raiding who doesn't know their optimal rotation. The parser is not for this group of people. You don't learn your optimal rotation by using a parser either. You either do the work yourself or read someone else's work for "highest mathematically possible PPS rotation". Then you whack a dummy to see if you can do it. If you realize you are making mistakes, then you fix them. If you can't do it (physically), then you should evaluate yourself and decide whether you should play in a group environment. And in both cases, you didn't need a parser.

I'm pro-parser btw, but I don't support reasons that are completely wrong.

This is entirely your opinion, perhaps you do not operate on some of these concepts but this does not mean others do not.

The forums (DPS subform in particular) are riddled with players asking how they can perform better in content or looking at their results and noting areas where they can improve.

If you're pro parser like you say, then why do you care about the reasons that someone wants it?

If a group of players is able to take parse data and use it for evaluation and improvement, not you or anyone else can claim that their reasons or methodology are wrong if it provides favorable results. It may mean that they were using it in a way you don't believe it was intended but if it makes positive change across the board then your objections are irrelevant.

Also I'm not entirely sure if you're trying to argue this in circles intentionally or not as many of the points you've raised have been answered already by many other posters throughout both this thread and the 80 page one in the DPS subforum.

Either way I doubt there's much more that can be said on the subject that hasn't been said countless times already, if you still disagree at this point I'm not sure I'm the right person to properly explain otherwise.

[UBERHAXED]

I disagree with the majority of this statement even if I'm aware of what you're trying to say.

Assuming anything about the skill level of the playerbase let alone anyone who actually raids is a recipe for disaster, it also discounts what motivates and helps various players learn.

This has been stated before but it might come as a surprise to you that there are many players who simply are unaware of how well they are or aren't performing and this goes both ways. There are plenty of players who lack the confidence to enter a raid because they think they are bad only to discover otherwise when shown tangible feedback (like a parse result) that they are better than they think they are and the results give them the confidence to attempt finding a raid group.

Assuming anything about the skill level of the player base, let alone any who does actually raid is a recipe for disaster. You should speak for yourself, not others. I haven't seen anyone who has decided to join a raid group after they were parsed. You're either serious about raiding or you're not. Anyone serious would have done their homework and learned to play their class, so when the fight comes, they will learn the fight, not how to DPS. This once again does not require parser (parsers didn't even exist for a while).

It has to start somewhere.

Like in a thread where a Ps4 player is asking for a personal parser so that they can improve.

Also I don't think it's ever been stated that adding a parser is suddenly going to add tons of capable players to the raid scene, but it might change the minds of a few that are on the fence, when they see their results. Likewise it might encourage others to practice a bit more if they find out they aren't as good as they think they are.

Once again, speak for yourself, don't assume that how someone else is. I think you somehow think that all the good players are on PC and none are on PS4 or PS3. Because unless that is true, then parsers don't seem to do what you think. If a personal parser was not needed to help these players, then what wizardry does the parser do help someone now?

No, I'm pretty sure i quoted it correctly:

Practice (learning method)

language; like many other things evolves with time, if you only go by the origin of an idiom you are going to be left behind when it comes to modern day vernacular.

On to the point however, while the script of a fight itself doesn't change the actions of the players in the fight may. This has been illustrated by more than a few posters when it comes to things like phase pushes etc.

I don't think it's necessary for me to touch on this again when many others have already done so sufficiently.

Practice doesn't make perfect. No one can be perfect. Practice will only make a person perform they way they repeated it. Hence the actual true idiom, practice makes permanent.

It's almost as if a parser were a tool that displays data and feedback that can be used and interpreted in various ways for evaluation based on the needs and the skill level of the group using it, additionally it's almost as if different groups have various ways of approaching and learning content perhaps based on the fact that there are various players with differing ability levels, motivations, and schools of thought.

I would not compare the practices and methodology of a world first raid group to a fresh group of new raiders starting right now that needs to use youtube guides, spreadsheets, and power point presentations as they learn and attempt raid content. I also use the term "need" loosely as the group is likely capable of learning and completing the fight without those aids but if they choose to use them and find a benefit in doing so it's not really the place of myself or anyone else to tell them otherwise.

If it works for them, it works for them much like the data a party receives and interprets from a parser.

It's like saying just because you can do the math by hand means that nobody ever should have to use a calculator, it just doesn't follow.

You know if unsuccessful people do what successful people are doing, then maybe they will be successful? You're asking for parsers for groups of people who have not cleared the current raid tier. But you are saying that the methodologies of people who have cleared are irrelevant. What you are looking for is magic. As I showed in my satirical script between Foo and Bar, it doesn't give the information you are looking for. It's more equivalent to: You take a test with 20 question. You know for a fact you knew 14 of the answers (and didn't know the other 6) when you read the questions. You finish the test "not knowing how you did".

This is entirely your opinion, perhaps you do not operate on some of these concepts but this does not mean others do not.

The forums (DPS subform in particular) are riddled with players asking how they can perform better in content or looking at their results and noting areas where they can improve.

If you're pro parser like you say, then why do you care about the reasons that someone wants it?

If a group of players is able to take parse data and use it for evaluation and improvement, not you or anyone else can claim that their reasons or methodology are wrong if it provides favorable results. It may mean that they were using it in a way you don't believe it was intended but if it makes positive change across the board then your objections are irrelevant.

Also I'm not entirely sure if you're trying to argue this in circles intentionally or not as many of the points you've raised have been answered already by many other posters throughout both this thread and the 80 page one in the DPS subforum.

Either way I doubt there's much more that can be said on the subject that hasn't been said countless times already, if you still disagree at this point I'm not sure I'm the right person to properly explain otherwise.

The same players could have searched the DPS forums they posted on for guides on the class. Also,
[dubious, citation needed]
Please do not try to speak for any one else but yourself. That is unless of course every one thinks exactly like you. Then feel free to speak for your clones. As for being pro-parser, that's like asking me what's the point of party elections (for example for republicans) because there's no why you can be in the same faction but have different views. Oh wait...