They Should Add An Official Damage Meter With One Condition

[Yeastyloins]

And so instead, we have the toxic casual playerbase demanding that nobody be *allowed* to crunch their numbers, lest the sky fall.

The point of what I said, which flew right over your head, is that the toxic casual community is fantastically hypocritical in their need to play a videogame, complain -endlessly- about letting people enjoy the parts of it they enjoy, and then immediately turn around and scream BURN THE WITCH! The moment someone dares to, oh, I dunno, enjoy playing something in a different way

The evil "elitist" wants to tabulate their numbers as part of a quest for improvement. A toxic casual wants to prevent the evil elitist from doing this, because that quest for improvement may make them look *gasp* incompetent by comparison. That's literally it, all else is what-if fearmongering that conveniently ignores both the fact that harassment is ALREADY against the TOS, and that toxic casuals blithely bitch about "elitists" all the time without censure.

IMO most people don't want meters in game because they would actually realize how terrible they are playing. Which is meaningless in normal content since who cares, tanks and healers can duo it together. But still when you see somebody doing 47% of the damage in a dungeon where as you are hovering somewhere around 20ish% you might be cursed with the thought that you might be doing something wrong.

[CosmicCoqui]

IMO most people don't want meters in game because they would actually realize how terrible they are playing. Which is meaningless in normal content since who cares, tanks and healers can duo it together. But still when you see somebody doing 47% of the damage in a dungeon where as you are hovering somewhere around 20ish% you might be cursed with the thought that you might be doing something wrong.

Tbh that statement of yours is why the devs don't want it in game. If someone is going to say something like that without parsers in game, imagine if they were added. Probably be a lot worse and then nothing can really be done about it. A lot of people who keep trying to push for parsers to be added in game just keep proving yoshi's point as to why they should not be added.

[Saraide]

Tbh that statement of yours is why the devs don't want it in game. If someone is going to say something like that without parsers in game, imagine if they were added. Probably be a lot worse and then nothing can really be done about it. A lot of people who keep trying to push for parsers to be added in game just keep proving yoshi's point as to why they should not be added.

Of course something can be done about it. It's already in place even. You dont get to harass someone over their performance. As yoship said in that one infamous liveletter you get punished for harassment before you get punished for using ACT.

[Rein_eon_Osborne]

Of course something can be done about it. It's already in place even. You dont get to harass someone over their performance. As yoship said in that one infamous liveletter you get punished for harassment before you get punished for using ACT.

This is something that people will 99.99% forget whenever numbers are brought up into this discussion, it's almost baffling. Selectiveness is real.

[SwingLifeAway]

This is something that people will 99.99%

99.9%? You disgusting parser, get out of this thread

[Rilifane]

99.9%? You disgusting parser, get out of this thread

Pretty sure they cheated to get this number anyway because that's what parsers do. You heard that? You're a cheat!

[Ronduwil]

This is something that people will 99.99% forget whenever numbers are brought up into this discussion, it's almost baffling. Selectiveness is real.

Context matters. The point, in the statements leading up to it, is that harassment is easy to verify, so they ban more frequently for that. ACT usage is not so easy to verify for them because they don't want to invade your privacy and install detection software to determine what else is running on your computer. He never said that they don't ban for ACT. He said that it's harder to prove. In that same interview, he also explicitly said not to use ACT. The reason the streamers are being banned for their use of the software is because they provided video evidence that they're using it, so SE was able to verify that they were breaking TOS without having to infect anyone with spyware. Regardless of how you misinterpreted previous statements, there's a big difference between, "We're looking the other way, so go for it," and "We're not going to invade your privacy to verify that you're not doing it, but please don't do it anyway because it's not allowed."

[Saraide]

Context matters. The point, in the statements leading up to it, is that harassment is easy to verify, so they ban more frequently for that. ACT usage is not so easy to verify for them because they don't want to invade your privacy and install detection software to determine what else is running on your computer. He never said that they don't ban for ACT. He said that it's harder to prove. In that same interview, he also explicitly said not to use ACT. The reason the streamers are being banned for their use of the software is because they provided video evidence that they're using it, so SE was able to verify that they were breaking TOS without having to infect anyone with spyware. Regardless of how you misinterpreted previous statements, there's a big difference between, "We're looking the other way, so go for it," and "We're not going to invade your privacy to verify that you're not doing it, but please don't do it anyway because it's not allowed."

ACT used without harassment is also not a problem. It's the most victimless crime possible. Harassment on the other hand isnt. He is saying that you get banned for harassment before you get banned for using ACT is because the relevant part is the harassment not the third party tool usage. Additionally it covers non ACT related harassment over performance because lets be real, if someone is exceptionally dogshit at the game I dont need ACT to notice. ACT is entirely irrelevant in the conversation about harassment over performance.

[Ronduwil]

ACT used without harassment is also not a problem. It's the most victimless crime possible.

Except that he never said that. In fact, he explicitly said:

I'm aware that there will be people using it to calculate their personal numbers, but I know you'll see this in the Party Finder: "Only join if you can prove that you can DPS xxx amount." We never want that to happen.

That has nothing to do with harassment and everything to do with gatekeeping. WoW embraces it, and this game thankfully does not. That's why I'm playing this game and not WoW.

Don't take my word for it. See Yoshi-P say it for yourself: https://youtu.be/e_i6mjiGerU?t=280

[Yeastyloins]

Tbh that statement of yours is why the devs don't want it in game. If someone is going to say something like that without parsers in game, imagine if they were added. Probably be a lot worse and then nothing can really be done about it. A lot of people who keep trying to push for parsers to be added in game just keep proving yoshi's point as to why they should not be added.

It's an honest thing. Though rather than a dps meter I would prefer if there were IN game means to teach people mechanics. I did the stuff with the smith when I first started playing and I don't think it adequately teaches new players these kinds of things. Things like considered AoE usage and when its again, considering using CDs when you get buffs. It would be simple way to implement it.

The largest issue is the game itself does a terrible job of teaching how to play in multiple scenarios. WoW has a "tutorial" like section when you boost a character where they have you practice both single target and AoE/Cleave abilities, core interactions within your toolkit, and important defensive/utilities. The initial job quests for RPR and SGE do have something like that but its very barebones.