Why do so many people FAIL at dps.

[Kaiser-Ace]

What I'm getting from this Parser Talk is that, while good for a general DPS range, that parser programs have questionable accuracy at best.

That sound to me like a peg for the "don't allow them" camp. But at the same time they do make otherwise invisible data visible to the players.

Add in my experience with Parser users and you find that the programs, like weapons IRL, are dependent on the intent of the user and that while a good many use the information with good or "morally neutral" intent that there are those groups of players that ruin it for every one by abusing their access to that semi-exclusive info.

[Kaurie]

That sound to me like a peg for the "don't allow them" camp. But at the same time they do make otherwise invisible data visible to the players.

I honestly don't know what you mean by a peg? Do you mean that it is a reason to vote against it? Because it is the primary reason why PC users want official parser support, so that they can have increased accuracy.

As for your 2nd part, I agree. However, I've seen a fair share of toxic behaviour without parsers, and I do not advocate removing stuff to prevent that. For example, I had a pretty toxic A1 run where a Tank wiped the party thinking we were doing a diff strategy, 2 people ganged up on him pretty hard. In this situation, the options to prevent this in the future are 1. remove mechanics, 2. remove tanks, 3. remove duty finder, 4. remove party chat. I don't think we should remove any of them, and I don't think that "some people may use it for evil" is a good reason to not implement it.

[Kosmos992k]

What I'm getting from this Parser Talk is that, while good for a general DPS range, that parser programs have questionable accuracy at best.

That sound to me like a peg for the "don't allow them" camp. But at the same time they do make otherwise invisible data visible to the players.

Side note, the data that the parsers use is in you battle log. Quite visible if you want it.

[Kaurie]

Side note, the data that the parsers use is in you battle log. Quite visible if you want it.

True that, I just wish DOTs were on there too.

[Kosmos992k]

True that, I just wish DOTs were on there too.

I think that is a limitation imposed by DoT being handled server side, so it's not in the battle log.

[Alahra]

What I'm getting from this Parser Talk is that, while good for a general DPS range, that parser programs have questionable accuracy at best.

They're more accurate than you think--many differences that come up between parses tend to result from different users having different settings. Two different parsing programs most likely will not parse the same either--it is best to compare results from the same program (FFXIVApp is horribly inconsistent compared to ACT, for instance). It is also good to make sure that folks are using the same settings (ACT in particular lets you adjust all sorts of things, from how long it waits to drop encounter, from whether or not to simulate DoT ticks). The DoT ticks in particular for ACT are simulated, rather than based off of actual data (meaning the program makes some assumptions about which ticks crit and how much they hit for in general, based on what buffs are up at the time of application--which means that two users parsing the same attacks can end up with some variation because one user's program simulated 5 critical hits and the other did 8 or something).

So no, parsers don't have 100% accuracy (nor did Recount in WoW), but they can provide a general ballpark for someone to gauge their own performance or those of their group numbers. Personally, I haven't used one in awhile, as I found I was starting to worry too much about numbers. But they can still be a useful tool. I think using them to analyze pick up groups isn't a very good use for them, though: they're best for tracking your own performance in similar situations (I did 1000 on this boss last time--was I able to get higher?) and for helping a group of people you run with regularly to improve.

[cgbspender]

They're more accurate than you think--many differences that come up between parses tend to result from different users having different settings. Two different parsing programs most likely will not parse the same either

Just like two same parsers with the exact same settings will parse different numbers. What else ?

[Alahra]

Just like two same parsers with the exact same settings will parse different numbers. What else ?

Having used ACT extensively with my static groups in the past, I'm skeptical of that actually happening to a degree that it invalidates the general value of the information and would need to see it demonstrated. Any variations should generally be small enough (often the result of DoT simulation variations, which I mentioned in my post, or other things, like ping or when the parser registers an individual user as in combat and thus starts recording, and so on) to still provide for a reliable benchmark.

Not that I take parser results as gospel--they have a lot of idiosyncrasies that anyone using them as a tool to gauge performance should keep in mind. But they're also the only tool we currently have to really gauge performance for individual DPS. Luckily, that's going to be changing soon, with the addition of the Training Hall (or whatever it's named).

[UBERHAXED]

The DoT ticks in particular for ACT are simulated

This is technically correct.

the program makes some assumptions about which ticks crit

This is incontestably correct.

and how much they hit for in general, based on what buffs are up at the time of application

This is completely false. ACT does not estimate DoT damage any longer since average DoT damage is sent from the server to the client (it is in fact not parsing the battle log, it uses your PC network traffic) and so damage per tick is no longer ball park estimated. Damage itself of course is random, but the server already calculates the average ahead of time, so the final value over the duration is correct. Adjustments due to spell speed, raging strikes, etc. are already calculated by the server and sent to the client so it is no longer necessary to do estimation. Critical hits however are (obviously) random and we don't know the true rates that we are criting in general so we can't really do much there. It will be interesting when we can do validation against the game's parser in the training hall. Although I don't know why people don't do validation right now against the game's parser in PvP...

[Alahra]

This is completely false. ACT does not estimate DoT damage any longer since average DoT damage is sent from the server to the client (it is in fact not parsing the battle log, it uses your PC network traffic) and so damage per tick is no longer ball park estimated.

That's good to know. I knew they made some changes to the way it worked toward the end of ARR, but didn't know they had managed to make the DoT readings more accurate.