Would you like an in-game parser?

[Kezy_Kaatapoh]

Forgive me when I laugh. Do you even know what kinds of things you can do with the data from a parser?

Yes. I'm fully aware of what a parser can and cannot do. All of those things you mentioned though don't involve information that you can't reasonably get otherwise, they just rearrange it or make it more prevalent. I can learn what a boss does, what the best CDs are to use at a given point in time, which CDs are available, which procs are up, etc. without the use of 3rd party tool. Those provide an edge, yes, but they just mean you have to spend less time working on your play.

A DPS meter, however, I cannot reasonably go into my battle log after every single pull and check what my DPS was. That's ridiculous, and that easily puts it far ahead of the other uses ACT provides. There's a reason we're talking about a DPS meter mainly here and not those other things.

So yes, I'd classify those things as preferential because all of the information it provides is readily available for me without the tool to know just as well as someone with the tool. What I can't do reasonably though is know my DPS, which makes it non preferential and more essential to high level play.

Again, just because there's always going to be inequality doesn't mean you don't try to close the gap. You seem to ignore that point.

Thanks for the condescending response though. You seem to be swell.

[Zojha]

Again, just because there's always going to be inequality doesn't mean you don't try to close the gap. You seem to ignore that point.

Do I? Nowhere do I claim you should not close the gap, nor do I even discourage it. Truly, I am going on in great detail how to close the gap that exists effectively and in a lasting manner. In case you missed it, again and brief this time: If you truly want to close the gap, enforce the rules already in place. Full stop. This makes the implementation of any third party program on terms of equality redundant because equality already exists under these circumstances. Full stop.

I have addressed that point before you even made it. Then, I addressed it again. And yet you claim I ignore it. I'm honestly not sure why you comment on a condescending tone in my post(s) when you apparently don't even read them anyway. But have fun pushing your agenda!

[Kezy_Kaatapoh]

Do I? Nowhere do I claim you should not close the gap, nor do I even discourage it. Truly, I am going on in great detail how to close the gap that exists effectively and in a lasting manner. In case you missed it, again and brief this time: If you truly want to close the gap, enforce the rules already in place. Full stop. This makes the implementation of any third party program on terms of equality redundant because equality already exists under these circumstances. Full stop.

I have addressed that point before you even made it. Then, I addressed it again. And yet you claim I ignore it. I'm honestly not sure why you comment on a condescending tone in my post(s) when you apparently don't even read them anyway. But have fun pushing your agenda!

I have read your posts. You've been encouraging closing the gap through removal of features, which is obviously not the path anyone wants. I shouldn't have to state that closing the gap in that fashion isn't good for the game and that adding features to systems that don't have them is the way to go.

Your point was made rhetorically, making it a null point, while you keep saying that we shouldn't add features to one because we can never have them all. So no, you didn't make that point and you keep failing to acknowledge the only truly reasonable solution to it. I'm not pushing an agenda, it would seem you are.