Would you like an in-game parser?

[Reynhart]

I would probably refrain from making generalized statements like these. They do nothing more than undermine both your character and your argument by attempting to paint the other side under a very general paintbrush of "abusive" players.

If you look at the points that were made here, most people claims they want a parser to judge their personal progression. For that, a character-by-character option would be a fine middle ground. If suddenly, they want to enforce the parser on you because they want to see your numbers, then it's a totally different topic.

You hear political polls where they polled 1,406 respondents and it apparently this is significant to them.

Like this result is significant to those who want a parser here. You can make statistics say a lot of things if you know how to twist them.
Last year, they made a poll to change schedule for nursery school in my city. 35% of people was in favor and 41% was against. The report said that since only 41% was against, then it was not the majority, and so they made the change...

[Ghishlain]

If you look at the points that were made here, most people claims they want a parser to judge their personal progression. For that, a character-by-character option would be a fine middle ground. If suddenly, they want to enforce the parser on you because they want to see your numbers, then it's a totally different topic.

I would like a group parser because for one (and now I'm going to start calling this my personal running joke) I want to see which player deserves all my Arrows and Balances on AST (lol).

The other is for transparency. There will be cases of harassment with the parser (their already are because some people just don't care about the legality of parsers) and there will be cases where that transparency will help alleviate conflict too.

ie., that one DPS who thinks "they are the best thing since sliced bread" trying to belligerently tell the other DPS how to actually DPS when they have less DPS than the healer. Don't really have a leg to stand on giving (bad) advice about DPS if you can't show you can DPS.

Like this result is significant to those who want a parser here. You can make statistics say a lot of things if you know how to twist them.
Last year, they made a poll to change schedule for nursery school in my city. 35% of people was in favor and 41% was against. The report said that since only 41% was against, then it was not the majority, and so they made the change...

Context is always important and as long as the posters have access to all the information, they can make judgements in their own way. As Reinha / Snoeswys has rightfully pointed out, there is some inaccuracies that cannot be accounted for due to the fact we can vote for multiple options. But a lot of numbers are there for everyone to see for their interpretation and misinterpreting the numbers like what was used in your example will be called out.

The problem with this is the forums are already somewhat biased in one direction or another. I imagine most of the player base doesn't come to the forums because they are more or less content with the game as is. I come for the 4.0 speculation threads ( I know, I know it's early ). The forums just represent the vocal part of the community which is probably even then a small portion. So this thread is a small sample of a sample

This is very true too. Not taking into account the size of the pool of posters he have available, the forum community will be different from the in-game community which will be different pending server to server and these communities will be different from the Reddit community, etc.

Ideally, the best poll to be made is one by S-E in the form of a login census and see what everyone would like. Though they might not recognize to do this if there isn't enough chatter about it on the forum.

Even though the forum is certainly a small and very specific part of the community, it's still a very visual and open tool for the development team. That's one of the reasons I continue to just debate this topic - the exposure it gives to the developers to see if they will move in one direction or the other.

[Neophyte]

Elitist, casual, yadda, yadda...

The options which widens the gap between hardcore/casual the most are 'minimum ilvl' and 'unsersized/unsynched'.

First one you don't want to join if you don't want to learn content and get better and better while trying to beat it.
Second one you don't want to join if you don't want to do just easy steamroll content.

So, do people get excluded here because they do not want that special option which is set in your pf?
Is this ok?*

*like: is it ok that 'undersized' is the norm and people wanting to do it the normal way have to search forever for a group?

If that's ok, then a parser would be okay, too, like mentioned in post #341.

Give people the option to choose. If it becomes the norm then live with it, like I have to live with the fact that I'll never find a ShivaEx synched group again. I have to make my own groups (stating "SYNCHED!!!!") and you'd have to make your own groups (stating "NO PARSE!!!), too.


Either it becomes the norm -> majority of ppl who do this content decided that parsers are ok.
Or it doesn't become the norm -> majority of ppl who do this content decided that parsers are not ok.

But since hardcore eitists are a minority this can't become the norm anyway, right?

[Reynhart]

I would like a group parser because for one (and now I'm going to start calling this my personal running joke) I want to see which player deserves all my Arrows and Balances on AST (lol).

Then, at the beginning, ask if others don't mind being parsed, and they'll uncheck their personal "hide damage" option, so that everybody will nicely be on the same page.
But, if they don't want, then it's their choice. There is no reason to do a "majority wins" here.

Give people the option to choose. If it becomes the norm then live with it, like I have to live with the fact that I'll never find a ShivaEx synched group again. I have to make my own groups (stating "SYNCHED!!!!") and you'd have to make your own groups (stating "NO PARSE!!!), too.

Then there must be a way to make sure that "NO PARSE" is actually no parse. Nothing prevent the leader from secretly parsing and kicking those that are slighty below his expectations.

[Neophyte]

Then, at the beginning, ask if others don't mind being parsed, and they'll uncheck their personal "hide damage" option, so that everybody will nicely be on the same page.
But, if they don't want, then it's their choice. There is no reason to do a "majority wins" here.

In fact it is 'party leader wins'. Always.
Like he chooses the content, heis the one who decides if you go unsynched or minimumilvl and he decides if he contributes the loot or you roll for it.
So why should you not apply that same logic for parsers?
Party leader decides and all you can do is bail out, if you don't want his settings.

[Reynhart]

In fact it is 'party leader wins'. Always.
Like he chooses the content, heis the one who decides if you go unsynched or minimumilvl and he decides if he contributes the loot or you roll for it.

If he chooses a different content than the one he told you, you'll see it when DF pops. You'll also immediately see what loot rule is in place, and if you're synced or not.
So, lying on these is just dumb. On the other hand, if parsing is not tied to the Duty or a personal option, then you're screwed.

[Neophyte]

If he chooses a different content than the one he told you, you'll see it when DF pops. You'll also immediately see what loot rule is in place, and if you're synced or not.
So, lying on these is just dumb. On the other hand, if parsing is not tied to the Duty or a personal option, then you're screwed.

But that's exactly what i'm talking about.
Read my post again and the linked one in there, too.

The way i want to see parsers implemented is exactly like the loot rules, but only available in Ex/Savage content which is not in the DF yet.
This would also show up when the duty pops. This would be only available for the newest (ex/savage) content until it's outdated (= available per DF).
This would only be available if you have a full group and everyone clicks on 'yes' (like when you choose to lootmaster).
This would only work if you trust your partyleader/-members (like lootmaster).

[Reynhart]

But that's exactly what i'm talking about.
Read my post again and the linked one in there, too.

Ok. I didn't read the linked post.
I thought you talked about what Play Style you could set in PF.

But, even then, unofficial parsers would still be usable as a way to go around the settings...like they are now.
On the other hand, if each player can hide its numbers, then it's done.