balance.. where art thou?

Discussion in 'The Veterans' Lounge' started by Drogba, Dec 5, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Zalamyr Augur

    Hopefully whenever this is inevitably addressed, they don't slap us filthy casuals around too much. This seems to, at least in decent part, be a raid geared thing. I know on my mini warrior tanking with a 2 hander is suicide and his sword and board dps is pretty anemic.

    It seems as though it's more of an issue that the dps scales too well with raid gear and adps. So hopefully they can find a way to address the scaling without punishing the lower end toons too much. I'd like to see dual wield be a more viable option for warriors myself.
  2. p2aa Augur

    If you tank content and want to do proper parsing, you need to use the tank stance, because it's the way it's intended.So we got a parse with a tank using 2H, which is not the tank stance, getting ripostes all the way on all mobs. Also, note that it's an EoK raid weapon. The other players were using group weapons ?
    Also, 2174 sec is 36 min, not 1 hour. Nice try to sell us a 1 hour parse lol.
    I kept the best for last. The ranger doing 16 k DPS, which as you say is a big lol. This will mechanically inflate your total DPS at the end of the parse. The mob HP pool is a given. If other do low damage, then mechanically you have others that do more damage to compensate, because at the end the mob needs to die. I'm sure that if the ranger actually played his class and not just auto attack that your total DPS would have been way less.
    So yes, your parse is biased all the way for many reasons.
  3. gotwar Augur

    Oh, this is a good one!

    This is a thread about Tank DPS. Whether that DPS is done with a sword and board, a 2hander, while in stance XYZ or while doing handstands and giving a wizard the finger is irrelevant. It's perfect that you highlight that tanks doing DPS isn't intended, because many would agree with you! In fact, that's the entire point of this thread - that the numbers tanks are achieving in EOK are way too high, and not intended by design.

    Also, every tank I've played with lately has been two-hander tanking in EOK group content, because the DPS is too good to give up. And yes, we've even stuck two-handed DPS warriors into melee ADPS groups on raids, because it's full of win and if you had extra tanks you'd be stupid not to take advantage of it.

    As opposed to using what, a rusty dagger? The majority of top-tier tanks in the game have access to this weapon or better right now, excluding horrific luck or Zerker heavy rosters. The only relevant data on this parse is the numbers of Gotwarx, so what parse_member002 was using is inconsequential.

    Btw, it's a 31 dly weapon (the lowest of the Warrior/Zerker usable 2handers), so it's use actually reduces the total damage attributed to riposte vs a slower weapon, like Scar or Mastermind. And again, singles. Too much of a noob to parse pad with bigger pulls.

    You're right! It was actually an hour and twenty minutes:

    First mob:
    A bokon fanatic
    ---Zone: Sul Vius: Demiplane of Life
    ---Start Time: 12/25/2016 12:03:43 AM
    Produced by GamParse v1.5.1.7

    Last mob!
    A ravenous fiend
    ---Zone: Crypt of Sul
    ---Start Time: 12/25/2016 1:22:57 AM
    Produced by GamParse v1.5.1.7

    But you are referring to actual time on mob, and in that regard, yes, it's only 30 minutes. Personally I would gauge that to be a fair representation of "sustained DPS", but p2aa has rejected my plebeian methods. Clearly we need a 24-hr parse to accurately calculate an acceptable average for Warrior DPS that meets your high standards, sir.

    I too have kept the best for last! No wait, not the best, the other thing. The worst. I'm not even sure how to begin unwrapping this mind boggling statement. I actually had to read it a few times over to understand wtf you were on about. "DPS" on a parse is a number calculated using simple division. It's the result of damage done divided by time. If the Ranger had done more DPS, Gotwarx's damage would have gone down... but so would the total time fought, as things would be dying faster and there would be less time per mob. In other words, the numbers would have stayed more or less the same. Being unable to grasp this parsing concept not only hurts my brain, but calls into question any past, present, and future comments related to evaluating parses that you may have.

    At this point, one of two things is clear:

    A) u trollin', misdirectin', and strawmanin' in this thread in order to poorly obfuscate the OP's valid point


    B) You just really don't understand how any of this works, what the thread you're posting in is about, or how to contribute to the topic in a positive and constructive way.

    But please, tell me more about how disgustingly biased the "total scrublet 2-day old Warrior pulling singles in a sub-optimal group" parse is.
  4. Warpeace Augur

    Well if one member of a group is allowed to do most of the damage and a DPS class barely does anything it does jack the parse up.
  5. fransisco Augur

    Hit the nail on the head there.
  6. gotwar Augur

    It doesn't though. Think about it. Damage per second is just (dmg)/(time). The more people we add to a parse that do damage, the lower everyone's individual damage (dmg) will be, but the fight time (time) will also be lowered. "DPS" is just an extrapolation of these numbers to arrive at a more useful determination of what they indicate.. Assuming Gotwarx performs consistently each fight, we can add any "DPS" number and still get similar results.

    If I have Mob_001 with 10 million hit points, and it takes guy_001 100 seconds to kill it, i have done 10 million damage over 100 seconds. My DPS is 100k.

    If we add guy_002, who does damage at a similar rate (100k), the time will be cut in half (50 seconds) while contributed damage for both guy_001 and guy_002 will be 5 million over that time. Or, 100k dps for both.

    If guy_002 is doing damage at a lesser rate (20k), the total fight time is now 83 (ish) seconds, guy_001's total damage is 8.3 million (ish), and guy_002's total damage is 1.6 million (ish). Or, 100k dps for guy_001.

    You can change these numbers around any way you'd like and still get a similar result. The more damage you add to guy_002, the less damage guy_001 does, but the fight time is going to scale downwards as well. The only time it makes a difference is if you start breaking down abilities/spells used, their cast times, and their cooldowns. Some classes have better "sweet spots" in regards to fight length. Enchanter is a good example of this, due to long cast times, the need to setup twincasts, and DoTs. In general, one of the big advantages of melee classes is they don't require this time to "ramp up." Their damage is on target at 0 seconds into the fight (unless bad) and contributing to their total DPS. There's a bit of wiggle room here for all classes, which is why long parse times in a vacuum eliminating all the variables are the preferred method for SpreadsheetQuest data collection..

    The only difference adding more DPS to another player involved in the fight, as it's relevant to this discussion, is total fight time. Shorter fights tend to give inaccurate numbers due to RNG. The longer a fight goes on, the more acceptable average we get from that fight as RNG slowly plays itself out. If anything, in the above posted parse, adding more Ranger DPS gives us a more questionable number, as it shortens the overall per-fight length.

    BUT! This is all a moot point. Talking about the intricacies of parse data is sort of irrelevant here 'cause total_scrublet_nubske_warrior_001 was still able to do approximately ALL OF THE DPS by mashing a spam key for an hour and a half.

    Seems legit.
  7. p2aa Augur

    Not really, either you link a tanking parse with a tanking stance, which is most players use, either you link a DPS parse and you don't tank. Do you know that many players cannot use 2H for tanking ? Or you think everyone is raid geared ?

    And where are you putting your melee DPS ? In tanks groups ? Are they so bad that you need tanks in DPS groups to do the job ?

    No, the majority of top tier tank don't have access to EoK raid weapons atm. If your tanks are gearing their DKP on 2H weapons, then big lol.

    Inconsequential ? You post a parse grouping with players that are bad or don't parse as they should be, and it comes from your own words, and you want to make us believe it's inconsequential. Lol

    Thanks to acknowledge it. And after this, you try to change it by saying it's a good representation of a sustained DPS, when the base of your assertion, which was you did 140 k DPS in 1 hour, is completly false.

    That's right, I didn't take into account the duration time. But it remains that the others in your group didn't parse like they should, so your result that tank DPS is too high, comparing it to bad players results, is a biased result. It's not tank DPS that is too high, it's others that didn't do like they should.
  8. valiantSeven Elder

    I don't know why people are wasting their time and breath on this crap anymore. The circular logic is just ridiculous.

    You get a parse where a tank is crushing people and it's the fault of everyone else for sucking. You get a parse where a tank is lower than RandomDPS001 and they're screaming "told you so!!!!111" while completely ignoring the possibility that the tank is the one that could be "sucking." Then we find out the parses are from the best guild in the game and the "everyone else is sucking" argument doesn't fit anymore, so we'll grab at whatever straws possible, up to and including gear, weapon selection, stances, what mob was being killed, how many other people there were in the zone not fighting the same mob, the temperature outside, the price of seafood in Alaska, the color of the tanks armor, and all this other useless crap that coincidentally enough is never questioned any other time a parse is linked. But now that tanks are in question and the conventional wisdom of these expert parse analyzers says that tanks can't possibly do good damage, any single parse ever that they weren't personally there for and playing every single character for with their leet skillz, it's an inconclusive parse that means nothing.

    People are impossible and the worst part of any situation, this thread just proves it. But please, keep jerkin each other around f it makes you feel better. Your infinite wisdom about parses and who's is bigger will definitely mean something IRL.
    Sikanle and Vrinda like this.
  9. fransisco Augur

    The reason they are denying it is that a year ago, all the tanks freaked out about mage pets - thus mage pets got destroyed in response.
    So they fill these posts with lies to try and distract the devs from noticing.
    Gyurika Godofwar likes this.
  10. Gilth New Member

    The point he's trying to make is clearly the tank is in dps mode. Yeah tanks are in a great spot right now but I could go ahead and make a video showing how op chanters can be swarming and tanking and locking agro. Stances were made so you sacrifice different aspects. Raid geared characters are going to have this edge because the expansions just aren't tuned like they use to be. It's a much faster paced game now then ever.

    And posting a parse where a ranger is clearly not even auto attacking very well just makes the parse look even more skewed. A good ranger can dominate those numbers that you did on warrior.
  11. RadarX Augur

    Folks, after 34 pages, more than a dozen forum guideline violation, and at least 4 topic changes I think we need to go ahead and put this one down. As always we appreciate any and all constructivefeedback and thank those of you who provided it.
    Bamkan and Maedhros like this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page