Please add damage meters, Yoshi P.

[Renalt]

I think by page 100 If you guys haven't convinced one side or the other...you should probably agree to disagree.

[Hoodcat]

Yeah and they are only hurting themselves and creating a bigger wall to overcome to the content, but at the same time cannot force it down their throat, let em be ignorant and they will finnaly catch on and go download . This is a circular argument no win scenario where they will feel empowered to claim to be a victim.

Just ignore it, the tools are their when they want em its not hard to get it auto installs itself. This shits just circular arguments, a system is already in place, let em be the shitters of normal content. Its a game they are paying for, let em feel safe not knowing what we see =p

[KeshLives]

The game doesn't necessarily have to tell you how to use your toolkits (though it would be nice), however, people need to be able to take criticisms about their playstyle and be willing to listen to someone when they tell them how to improve and I would say this is the biggest hurdle.

On the surface, what you just said, I have no problem with. However, too often the implementation of 'criticism' usually leaves much to be desired. The words 'trash', 'garbage' and 'uninstall', for instance should not be part of it, but, many people who like to give criticism seem to enjoy using those words, among others, and, well, no one is going to take criticism in good spirits when given that way. The criticism is going to be completely ignored, and the person will be less likely to pay attention to criticism from anyone after that.

i.e. criticism is fine. You do it the wrong way, the person you were supposedly trying to help, will instead ignore you and anyone who even starts to act like you. So, if you *actually* want to help people, as some of you say, then you need to make sure you don't act the way some have shown here in the forums. In simple words, criticism is fine, but being a dick about it means you might as well save your breath, no matter how good it may feel to you.

[Kaurhz]

Okay, so... how does one get 7 players who are not prepared for the content at hand?

Is it by creating a PuG for a Savage farm with the automated Duty Completed check and getting... 7 players all of whom were carried?

And that's supposed to be the party-starter's fault?

Or, heck, even if it's a DF for, say, Titania Normal... how the heck is the onus supposed to be on the single competent person to have just assumed no one else in a matchmade group would meet the various obvious expectations of going into a 73 trial and therefore make a PF instead where he would... what, check their logs? their achievements? require absurd ilvl?




Of course, but also...

Why would anyone need to say anything about the numbers if everyone has those same numbers? (Else we end up with the likes of "You're doing 18k." -> "And the brown floor is brown.")

The communication following shared facts would be the same as simply whatever would follow the finger-pointing and "No, I know my class perfectly!" / "Clearly not!" shenanigans we have now (all things I would think we'd rather not do / would rather skip past), leaving relevant only actionable or long-tail advice: "Hold 2nd wave of CDs; he jumps immediately," "Please dodge," "Please practice," etc.

I'll probably bother to analyze this properly in the morning, but to take out a key point on the note of finger-pointing, this is precisely another issue that would result from allowing certain information to be public and readily available without infringing on ToS, basically. E.g., people are generally more inclined to believe they themselves are of no fault, irrespective of where performance deficits are, which just makes narrowing down a whole lot more cumbersome.

OK, your DPS is low... But why is it low? Did you die to a mechanic that was your own responsibility? Are you proportionately geared compared to everyone else in the group? (Granted, easy to determine when in the group) - Or are you just simply not playing your class up to par? Is it that you fundamentally misunderstand the class -- Or is it something a little more nuanced than that? E.g., did someone else fail a mechanic that resulted in your own death? and as such a loss in DPS.

People will habitually always jump to a convenient conclusion that has 'led to the result' of the fact, regardless of whether this is reality or not. A shared fact is only as good as a group, and an individual's ability to properly and responsibly deduce the basis/reasoning behind the fact. A crucial thing about shared facts, is they're a double-edged sword.

I'll respond to the rest in the morning, if there even is anything left, and if I even remember to do so.

[Packetdancer]

A live DPS meter is a terrible idea. Even the third-party tools out there don't give a proper breakdown when running live.

For those in the thread who aren't familiar with how this works, "DPS" is not so simple as "how much damage did you do?" That would be what's referred to as "aDPS" or "actual DPS" -- the actual damage you did to the boss.

But that aDPS value will contain damage generated as a result of the AST giving you card buffs. It will contain damage generated as a result of the SCH putting Chain Strat on the boss or the BRD's song, or whatever else. In short, your aDPS is also dependent on the rest of the party and their use of their party utility tools, alignment of raid buffs, etc.

As such, the metric most raiders use is rDPS or "raid DPS"; this is your aDPS value subtracting any damage you dealt that was due to buffs from other players (or other players' debuffs on the boss), but adding back in any damage done by other players as a result of your buffs (or your debuffs on the boss). It thus gives a better representation of what you contribute to a fight.

Having a live in-game meter would very likely give you the aDPS value, which is not actually the damage value most raiders care about. Meaning it would not actually be that useful to most raiders. (Though, yes, I concede even a less-useful metric is potentially more useful than no metric at all. Still.)

Now, it's true that meters can help a lot with self-improvement too; you want to see if something you're trying differently lets you deal damage more effectively, etc. But if we want the game to solve that problem in-game, I'd argue that having a live damage meter is not the right way to do it.

Have something that more or less "records" your last X number of instanced duties, and does an FFLogs-style analysis on them (to get rDPS). Then have a Hall of the Novice companion, a "Hall of the Master", with an NPC possessing the Echo whose specific gift is to see and judge someone's past combats.

Walk in and talk to that NPC, and he could give you both a general parse-percentage breakdown ("I see that roughly 23% of other <job> performed more effectively than you in similar fights.", e.g. a 77% parse) and some XIVAnalysis-style advice ("In reviewing your fight, I see that you could use Asylum more often to avoid needing to actively heal the tank as much; remember that there are scenarios where it can be worth placing a mitigating ground effect even if it's only the tank taking damage.").

This would provide actionable advice to folks looking to improve, be accessible on console, and since you would go review your own records, you do away with the usual concern about a small but loud subset of people using the damage meter to be jerks to other players. (On the grounds that "if the devs didn't want us to tell the black mage they do less DPS than a dead healer, they wouldn't give us a tool that tells us that!" or whatever.)

Would an analysis tool like that be a lot more work than just a live damage meter? Absolutely, yes. Do I think it would be a lot more useful (and probably less toxic) tool than just a live damage meter? Also yes, very much so.

[BaconBits]

I think by page 100 If you guys haven't convinced one side or the other...you should probably agree to disagree.

[Shurrikhan]

A shared fact is only as good as a group, and an individual's ability to properly and responsibly deduce the basis/reasoning behind the fact. A crucial thing about shared facts, is they're a double-edged sword.

But again, what's the actual point of comparison here? It's being reliant solely on eyeballing, with zero quantitative context and all information tinted by perception, vs. also having that shared, quantitative data that can anchor that inquiry.

It's one big step completed, from which those deductions can then be made.

"Who has been impacted, and by how much?" is still a question you need to answer before you can parse out cause.

People will habitually always jump to a convenient conclusion that has 'led to the result' of the fact, regardless of whether this is reality or not.

That doesn't change from having actual data. What you're describing is simply excessive presumption {Did bad -> Must not know rotation}, but that itself is still an improvement over the likes of {Off-meta job -> Must be the problem} or {Died earlier than everyone else -> Must be the problem (despite no party-coordinating mechanics spawning during their death and they're more than making up for it)}.

A live DPS meter is a terrible idea. Even the third-party tools out there don't give a proper breakdown when running live.

While I don't agree that it would be a terrible idea, I do think it would both be a huge waste of an opportunity (as first impressions only come once) and would be bad if people conflated it with the whole of performance. It's the first major step in laying of facts; as you've noted, though, the why is often the more actionable (e.g. 'our strat requires melee to ping-pong across the arena, sacrificing uptime, because the MCH raid leader literally doesn't understand what constrained uptime is').

Would an analysis tool like that be a lot more work than just a live damage meter? Absolutely, yes. Do I think it would be a lot more useful (and probably less toxic) tool than just a live damage meter? Also yes, very much so.

Absolutely. 100% agreed.

To be clear, though, I don't think even bringing just a scribble (a raw dps parser) to an art show (what all is usefully doable) would outright add any toxicity, nor is my problem with such basic tools that they're live.

Rather, it's that what is solely a raw damage parser can't conveniently tie into things other than damage and thereby be situated by their contexts.

See the difference between ACT and Details (where active dps [damage done while alive], %uptime, interrupts, avoidable damage, mitigation, time spent at critical HP, etc., can all likewise be tracked), for instance, or between a raw damage parser and an effective potency parser (which tends, nearer to relative performance, to be a much more useful metric even if you'd still want total raw party dps included somewhere just for comparison to enrage timers).

[Shurrikhan]

Yeah and they are only hurting themselves and creating a bigger wall to overcome to the content, but at the same time cannot force it down their throat, let em be ignorant and they will finnaly catch on and go download . This is a circular argument no win scenario where they will feel empowered to claim to be a victim.

Just ignore it, the tools are their when they want em its not hard to get it auto installs itself. This shits just circular arguments, a system is already in place, let em be the shitters of normal content. Its a game they are paying for, let em feel safe not knowing what we see =p

If no one were running face first into those walls, repeatedly, we wouldn't likely be having discussions like this, as there'd be no conflicts to warrant them. But they are, and that hurts both sides.

Moreover, the slower people are to cross that wall...

• the more conflicts we face, worsening user experience (for both ends of that wall), and
  
• the smaller the effective playerbase will be each for lower-end and, especially upper-end content -- leaving queue times longer than they otherwise would be, leaving freedom of grouping less than it would be, and allowing content to effectively die out faster than it otherwise would.

That enough head-bashing against the cliff will eventually expose a way up it for most people... doesn't make it any less a nuisance or the lost opportunities any lesser. You can build ladders, set ropes, teach how to climb, etc., at no cost to the heights reached.

It is in the interest, too, of more competent players to help, or to have systems which help, others grow competent.

And any improvement to make that path more obvious and take the wind out of "victim" / "victor" narratives or similar dichotomies is, itself, an improvement, a relative "win".

There's no harm in the game better teaching how to play the game, be that through the content itself --e.g., by leveraging its relatively long initial leveling time for more steadily increasing levels of difficulty (a "better difficulty curve")-- or by including supportive tools (specifically, tools that make one more cognizant of where and how they could improve instead of simply reducing difficulties).

[Magikazam]

Damage meters, such as those provided by FFLogs, can create an atmosphere of competition and toxicity within the Final Fantasy XIV community. While it is true that a small percentage of players utilize these tools, their impact can be disproportionately felt by those who do not wish to participate in this type of environment.

Instead of relying on external metrics to measure success, it is important to focus on improving one's own skills and abilities within the game. One possible way to do this besides doing raids constantly and learning your rotations, double weaving and timing the pulls, SE should/could add solo challenge dungeons specifically designed to hone these skills.

Overall, it is essential to prioritize inclusivity and enjoyment for all players, rather than catering to the desires of a select few who may be more interested in performance metrics.
Finally, you don't need Damage meters to complete any content in this game.

It almost like you could mesure things like how well you do mechanics and how well you do rotation and weave by the amount of damage you do. Turn out people who don't dodge AOE deal less damage when they die.

[Magikazam]

On the surface, what you just said, I have no problem with. However, too often the implementation of 'criticism' usually leaves much to be desired. The words 'trash', 'garbage' and 'uninstall', for instance should not be part of it, but, many people who like to give criticism seem to enjoy using those words, among others, and, well, no one is going to take criticism in good spirits when given that way. The criticism is going to be completely ignored, and the person will be less likely to pay attention to criticism from anyone after that.

i.e. criticism is fine. You do it the wrong way, the person you were supposedly trying to help, will instead ignore you and anyone who even starts to act like you. So, if you *actually* want to help people, as some of you say, then you need to make sure you don't act the way some have shown here in the forums. In simple words, criticism is fine, but being a dick about it means you might as well save your breath, no matter how good it may feel to you.

Yea and the TOS allow you to report people calling each other trash and garbage.

Why do you all act like implementing a DPS metter will magically allow people to be toxic without any kind of punishment?