Encounter Logging

majulook

Kihra wrote: »

Solinur wrote: »

Depending on the implementation of the LOG on ZOS side it should be possible to parse the log file (not manually but with some program) and deanonymize players (e.g. Write them on paper and do a search and replace on "Anon" to "Solinur"). This would work if only one selected the option, but if the players can still be separated, (e.g. they are replaced by "Player 1", "Player 2", ... then with a liitle info from CMX or something that also gathers combat info you could cross reference the names)..

While that would work to show their names in the report, for identifying characters there are other components involved, i.e., a hashed character id and the owning account name. Even if you did a search and replace to deanonymize the names, unless you know the player's hashed character id, my site would know this is not the same character and not lump any ranks etc. in with the real one.

Instead of making those opting out show up as Anonymous Player can you replace the name with an actual Character / Player name?

This way every Anonymous Player would be replaced with a single actual ESO players account that was created specifically for this?

All data could be shown and a players name would be there just not the actual player.

DjMuscleboy02

Finally, man I can't wait to kick people from the group when they don't do over 20k dps lol there's just no excuse anymore

Masel

Maybe we all need to just calm down and see how it is on Monday, then come back and give some funded feedback instead of jumping on each others throats here. Just an idea...

hedna123b14_ESO

Masel wrote: »

Maybe we all need to just calm down and see how it is on Monday, then come back and give some funded feedback instead of jumping on each others throats here. Just an idea...

That seems like a rational approach...these are ESO forums, sorry we cant have that here...

hedna123b14_ESO

DjMuscleboy02 wrote: »

Finally, man I can't wait to kick people from the group when they don't do over 20k dps lol there's just no excuse anymore

Toxic elitist...probably in Hodor...

Masel

DjMuscleboy02 wrote: »

Finally, man I can't wait to kick people from the group when they don't do over 20k dps lol there's just no excuse anymore

I cant wait to tell them to remain in my group until I have analysed the log I uploaded and evaluated whether they fulfilled my group requirements and then kick them. Oh wait that doesnt make any sense..

Fallewarrior

When I was really active in this game, I helped a *** of people with dps, gear and gold.

But that can't be true because toxic elitist Hodor DD..

Casuals are way more toxic & entitled then endgame players are. Change my mind.

Halke

Fallewarrior wrote: »

When I was really active in this game, I helped a *** of people with dps, gear and gold.

But that can't be true because toxic elitist Hodor DD..

Casuals are way more toxic & entitled then endgame players are. Change my mind.

I see Hodor in your sig

Enough said.

((Am I doing this right?))

Solinur

Fallewarrior wrote: »

When I was really active in this game, I helped a *** of people with dps, gear and gold.

But that can't be true because toxic elitist Hodor DD..

Casuals are way more toxic & entitled then endgame players are. Change my mind.

Disagree, in part. Toxic people can be anywhere, got nothing to do with how much DPS they do.

idk

templesus wrote: »

idk wrote: »

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

majulook wrote: »

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

Idinuse wrote: »

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

Idinuse wrote: »

FatalForce wrote: »

@anitajoneb17_ESO I really think you don't comprehend the tools that are currently available and well known by the majority of raid leaders. Look at this addon, Hodor Reflexes - DPS & Ultimate Share; it allows you to recreate an entire group damage share by having each person individually broadcast their own damage whilst collecting information from others in the group. It's not a new concept, but the current best option to do so. This won't change anyone from forcing anyone else to report damage; if anything this tool is less oppressive in that regard because it requires someone to go look outside the game where as the damage share addons are available for immediate viewing in the game itself.

What you are advocating is essentially the blocking of any damage information from being transmitted at all; and frankly I think this is willfully ignorant of other peoples goals and desires in the game. It really feels like you simply want to be upset for the sole purpose of being upset.

For many end game raiders it doesn't take a damage share addon to know that doing a boss you normally can do in 30 seconds is now taking 4 minutes to know the group damage is low.

My god what an elitist tone you have in your condescending attitude to anyone not interested in the elitist circle jerking and e-peen measuring.

The tools that exist are perfectly suitable for raids and players to improve. Publicly making private in game data, or even gathering it, about a player (actions taken, damage or hot done) or absence there of public must be some sort of privacy breach that needs to be looked at imo. This sort of data gathering about a player does not fall in good soil with EU law without it being opting in, I can tell you that. https://www.gdpreu.org/compliance/fines-and-penalties/

This kind of "service" needs to be consciously enabled by choice. The rest of the elite PvE community can continue using CMX and Hodor addons or just make the optimal e-peen measure/bully generator add for yourselves and keep using it without forcing it upon the entire player base.

The attitude of the Class Representatives and the sniffy attitude towards the average (and majority) player makes me think I understand some strange balancing decisions lately.

Considering how serious Zos is in regards of "naming and shaming" and publicly making a name appear in screenshots and vid caps here on a Forum you need an invite to join, and then making something like this publicly available is, as I see it, rather mind blowing.

Here is an example who has no idea how the tool works making outrageous and unsubstantiated claims. YOU GET A GOLD STAR!

Oh, so you are telling me someone in a raid I'm in can not upload my name and my performance to a website outside of ZOS to a third party without me lifting a finger to sop it?

Well then I'm mistaken.

IT WONT IDENTIFY YOU BY NAME UNLESS YOU LET IT and to let it you have to go in and register. Which is my understanding. While ALL data is collected, ONLY the data that is allowed to be public is made public. This is my understanding of it.

Were did you see this? I read a statement from someone who claimed to be with the web site, that said you had to registrar with the web site or email them your character names to opt out.

After extensively speaking with the site's maker here is the breakdown:
1. An in game default option will OPT YOU OUT of revealing your identity in logs (or at least its up to ZoS what will be the default option)
2. You have to select in game to OPT IN.
3. Your data IS collected, but is unidentifiable, unless 11 people have it enabled and you are the 12th...however sorry to say that even without this site if 11 people have CMX and you dont, they WILL know that it is YOU dragging the group down.
4. The data is uploaded to the site, which then follows the in game checkbox so if you have OPT out selected, you wont be identified.

Hedna. I know your a bright person from years of seeing your posts in these forums. I am surprised you cannot see that there will be cases we can identify who was anonymous and identify their data if they solely issued the in game settings to opt out.

As stated several times, that can currently be done more extensively utilizing CMX.

This is not about CMX. This thread is about this new tool. Please bring up relevant points.

Halke

idk wrote: »

templesus wrote: »

idk wrote: »

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

majulook wrote: »

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

Idinuse wrote: »

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

Idinuse wrote: »

FatalForce wrote: »

@anitajoneb17_ESO I really think you don't comprehend the tools that are currently available and well known by the majority of raid leaders. Look at this addon, Hodor Reflexes - DPS & Ultimate Share; it allows you to recreate an entire group damage share by having each person individually broadcast their own damage whilst collecting information from others in the group. It's not a new concept, but the current best option to do so. This won't change anyone from forcing anyone else to report damage; if anything this tool is less oppressive in that regard because it requires someone to go look outside the game where as the damage share addons are available for immediate viewing in the game itself.

What you are advocating is essentially the blocking of any damage information from being transmitted at all; and frankly I think this is willfully ignorant of other peoples goals and desires in the game. It really feels like you simply want to be upset for the sole purpose of being upset.

For many end game raiders it doesn't take a damage share addon to know that doing a boss you normally can do in 30 seconds is now taking 4 minutes to know the group damage is low.

My god what an elitist tone you have in your condescending attitude to anyone not interested in the elitist circle jerking and e-peen measuring.

The tools that exist are perfectly suitable for raids and players to improve. Publicly making private in game data, or even gathering it, about a player (actions taken, damage or hot done) or absence there of public must be some sort of privacy breach that needs to be looked at imo. This sort of data gathering about a player does not fall in good soil with EU law without it being opting in, I can tell you that. https://www.gdpreu.org/compliance/fines-and-penalties/

This kind of "service" needs to be consciously enabled by choice. The rest of the elite PvE community can continue using CMX and Hodor addons or just make the optimal e-peen measure/bully generator add for yourselves and keep using it without forcing it upon the entire player base.

The attitude of the Class Representatives and the sniffy attitude towards the average (and majority) player makes me think I understand some strange balancing decisions lately.

Considering how serious Zos is in regards of "naming and shaming" and publicly making a name appear in screenshots and vid caps here on a Forum you need an invite to join, and then making something like this publicly available is, as I see it, rather mind blowing.

Here is an example who has no idea how the tool works making outrageous and unsubstantiated claims. YOU GET A GOLD STAR!

Oh, so you are telling me someone in a raid I'm in can not upload my name and my performance to a website outside of ZOS to a third party without me lifting a finger to sop it?

Well then I'm mistaken.

IT WONT IDENTIFY YOU BY NAME UNLESS YOU LET IT and to let it you have to go in and register. Which is my understanding. While ALL data is collected, ONLY the data that is allowed to be public is made public. This is my understanding of it.

Were did you see this? I read a statement from someone who claimed to be with the web site, that said you had to registrar with the web site or email them your character names to opt out.

After extensively speaking with the site's maker here is the breakdown:
1. An in game default option will OPT YOU OUT of revealing your identity in logs (or at least its up to ZoS what will be the default option)
2. You have to select in game to OPT IN.
3. Your data IS collected, but is unidentifiable, unless 11 people have it enabled and you are the 12th...however sorry to say that even without this site if 11 people have CMX and you dont, they WILL know that it is YOU dragging the group down.
4. The data is uploaded to the site, which then follows the in game checkbox so if you have OPT out selected, you wont be identified.

Hedna. I know your a bright person from years of seeing your posts in these forums. I am surprised you cannot see that there will be cases we can identify who was anonymous and identify their data if they solely issued the in game settings to opt out.

As stated several times, that can currently be done more extensively utilizing CMX.

This is not about CMX. This thread is about this new tool. Please bring up relevant points.

Wait. Someone is saying that your fear/concern is already available in a widely used tool that actually does that better. How is that not relevant to the discussion? Correct, it does not make your fear not exist, but it does put it in the context of the real world, where it belongs.

code65536

@anitajoneb17_ESO @idk And anyone else who are expressing concerns about this.


1. Let's just agree that the in-game default should be to exclude the character name and to appear anonymous in the logs.
Default should be opt-in, not opt-out, and I agree that people have a right to be upset if it is indeed defaulted to not anonymous and that people have to opt-out. This might already be the case, actually. And if it isn't, I would join you in arguing for it. And I expect that everyone in the raiding community would have no objection to nameless being the default. It seems strange that there is already so much hand-wringing over what a default setting is when that default setting hasn't even been revealed.


2. Regarding name/shame, what scenario does this tool enable that is currently not already possible?
This is a very important question and none of you have been able to answer it.

For example, my friend @Drummerx04 once PUGed a dungeon as a tank. It was vet BC2. The one with the Daedroths that spawn on a timer, and the "hard mode" is to kill the boss with at least three Daedroths alive. The DPS in this group was so low that there were already 7 Daedroths that had spawned by the time the boss reached 83% health. He took a screenshot and shared it in Discord. And in that screenshot, you can see the group frame and see the character names of the tank, healer, and two DDs.

This is all base game stuff. Group frame showing names/roles is base game. Screenshot button is base game. Boss health bar is base game. And you can easily count the number of Daedroths that had spawned.

You don't need any addons. You don't need fancy logging or analysis. Yes, he did have Combat Metrics, and if you look closely at the screenshot, you could see the total damage and extrapolate from that what each DD was averaging. But I never did, because the picture spoke for itself. And yes, the group frame showed the character names of these DDs. Again, I did not care, nor did anyone else who looked at the screenshot cared. The screenshot was meant to show what could go wrong in a dungeon PUG. The only times I even pay attention to someone's @ name in a dungeon is if they're really good and as a result I want to get to know them better. Otherwise, I really couldn't care less who they are.

So, again, please answer the question. As far as naming and shaming goes, what does the logging enable that isn't already possible with something as simple as a screenshot showing the total group DPS? Or a Twitch streamer streaming a Group Finder PUG? Or even just someone retelling their experience? All those forum posts that start with, "I was in this dungeon PUG today, and ..."


3. There is more to this than just DPS
Anita asked, rhetorically, if we claim that this tool doesn't add any additional risk of name/shame, then what value does this tool add? Looking at sample uploads at wowlogs and fflogs, it adds a lot. It shows a timeline of the fight. Periods when DPS is low and periods when DPS is high. It showed incoming damage. It shows healing. It shows what enemy abilities are killing players. There's more to a fight than a DPS number. A deeper diagnostic dive into the details of the fight doesn't necessarily mean more shaming.

And I want to also revisit an example that Anita gave earlier in the thread about the FG2 spider lady boss. The one that enrages and becomes harder to kill as her pet spiders die. In that post, ignorance of this mechanic is used as an example of how DPS-centric the game is (I disagree; ignorance of this mechanic is an example of how often people just jump the waterfall and skip this boss in FG2). But this, ironically, is a great example of how such a logging tool would be a great teaching instrument. You would be able to see from the timeline graph that DPS decreases and incoming damage increases when a spider dies. This is actually a reason why real-time in-game reporting could be useful, because someone ignorant of the mechanic is unlikely to be the type of person to go through the trouble of enabling logging and then uploading and examining that log to understand what happened. Which brings me to my final point...


4. This is not a base-game feature
The logging is base-game, yes. But what you do with the log is not. And it is, AFAICT, a bit of a hassle involving a third-party website. As I argued earlier, this is analogous to saying that real-time combat events in the addon API is a base-game feature, but what you do with that (e.g., capturing that information with Combat Metrics) is not. So much of your argument hinges on this being more accessible than existing tools like CMX. I honestly have a hard time believing that. Combat events are always being sent to your game. Logging is not always enabled. I always have Combat Metrics running, so those events are being analyzed in real-time all the time. Of the logs that I do generate, I will only upload a portion of them for analysis--only if something was of particular interest (e.g., a run where I did well that I want to save... or a run that I'm trying to diagnose).

FatalForce

So let me break this down @Idinuse

Idinuse wrote: »

My god what an elitist tone you have in your condescending attitude to anyone not interested in the elitist circle jerking and e-peen measuring.

So you call me condescending, without actually saying why I am, or what exactly you disagree with; then resort to labeling the end game raiding scene as 'elitist circle jerking and e-peen measuring'. It may be just me, but I would never label someone as such without actually knowing that person. I've raided competitively a long time, and you're 100% correct that there are some people that are as you so describe, however I think my past actions in the game and the people I've played with speak for themselves and you would be hard pressed to find a person, let alone several, that would classify me as such.

Let's assume you weren't directing that at me personally (though you quoted my post, then said I had an elitest tone), where do you get off labeling people that like to enjoy the game by playing it to the best of their capabilities as elitest circle jerking players? That's pretty absurd to generalize. I'm genuinely curious to how many of the end-game raiders you've actually talked to, because as it's been stated here multiple times, the majority of the top of the top are actually really nice players. You might want to put down your pitchfork and have a chat with some of us.

Idinuse wrote: »

The tools that exist are perfectly suitable for raids and players to improve.

You are 100% correct, they are suitable for raids and players to improve; however this tool though collecting similar/the same information does so, and presents the data, in a different manner. I've read several people bringing up the point of, if this is the same information as CMX then why bother with it. The answer to this is that it's on a different scale than what CMX currently reports. CMX will log, in great detail, the entire combat log of an encounter. That specific encounter then gets aggregated and presented in a window with damage done by a person to specific targets, heals per second, debuffs, buffs, etc. This is done on a per combat encounter basis. The tool that is being presented will present similar (a lot of the same information) but with the ability to not only see on a per fight basis, but also on a per trial/dungeon basis giving you a much broader scope at how you are doing. To do this now requires a person to print screen every CMX from every person in the group and aggregate all that information by hand. Alternatively, you can use Hodor Reflexes while recording your game play, then go back and watch your video and manually enter how everyone in the group was doing into an excel sheet, then manually manipulate all that data yourself. I've done this, it's the best we have; but it's a painstakingly difficult way to analyze how a group is doing. This tool will effectively automate that process. The person that is handling the website has done this for multiple different MMO's, it's that persons livelihood by making money off of advertisements, etc. In this regard, that person probably is the world expert on handling this type of information, and instead of ZoS reinventing the wheel here, they turned to external help to leverage that persons knowledge.

Idinuse wrote: »

Publicly making private in game data, or even gathering it, about a player (actions taken, damage or hot done) or absence there of public must be some sort of privacy breach that needs to be looked at imo. This sort of data gathering about a player does not fall in good soil with EU law without it being opting in, I can tell you that. https://www.gdpreu.org/compliance/fines-and-penalties/

This is getting to peoples concerns about this violating privacy laws. This person has done the leaderboards for WoW and FF to name a few, I'm pretty sure if there was any legal issues with this they would have surfaced by now on other platforms. I really doubt there is any issue with such laws, or those other log sites would have been taken down a long time ago. There was another comment about how no other addon collects players names/characters names and what they do in game and displays it externally, which is false. There is esoleaderboards.com which gathers all the leaderboard scores in game and displays them, this archives all scores for PC NA and EU.

Idinuse wrote: »

This kind of "service" needs to be consciously enabled by choice. The rest of the elite PvE community can continue using CMX and Hodor addons or just make the optimal e-peen measure/bully generator add for yourselves and keep using it without forcing it upon the entire player base.

I would personally agree, that by default the sharing should be forced to be defaulted to opting IN. I also wouldn't see any issues with preventing a group from reporting at all unless EVERY person in that group enables it.

Idinuse wrote: »

The attitude of the Class Representatives and the sniffy attitude towards the average (and majority) player makes me think I understand some strange balancing decisions lately.

Instead of generically complaining about class reps and a 'sniffy attitude towards the average player', can you instead articulate why you feel slighted, or what can be done to help this?

Idinuse wrote: »

Considering how serious Zos is in regards of "naming and shaming" and publicly making a name appear in screenshots and vid caps here on a Forum you need an invite to join, and then making something like this publicly available is, as I see it, rather mind blowing.

[/quote]

I will assume ZoS will make the smart choice and force people to opt-in, in this manner there is no such public naming and shaming unless you choose to enable it. You are otherwise anonymous with the only ability to remove that anonymity by having someone in the run take a screenshot, got to that run on the website, and then cross out names that are listed to find the last person. As I, and multiple others have stated, this can already be done with current tools (in a real-time manner) and in practice, doesn't happen.

@idk I think I responded to one of your remarks in this long winded message.

Masel

code65536 wrote: »

@anitajoneb17_ESO @idk And anyone else who are expressing concerns about this.


1. Let's just agree that the in-game default should be to exclude the character name and to appear anonymous in the logs.
Default should be opt-in, not opt-out, and I agree that people have a right to be upset if it is indeed defaulted to not anonymous and that people have to opt-out. This might already be the case, actually. And if it isn't, I would join you in arguing for it. And I expect that everyone in the raiding community would have no objection to nameless being the default. It seems strange that there is already so much hand-wringing over what a default setting is when that default setting hasn't even been revealed.


2. Regarding name/shame, what scenario does this tool enable that is currently not already possible?
This is a very important question and none of you have been able to answer it.

For example, my friend @Drummerx04 once PUGed a dungeon as a tank. It was vet BC2. The one with the Daedroths that spawn on a timer, and the "hard mode" is to kill the boss with at least three Daedroths alive. The DPS in this group was so low that there were already 7 Daedroths that had spawned by the time the boss reached 83% health. He took a screenshot and shared it in Discord. And in that screenshot, you can see the group frame and see the character names of the tank, healer, and two DDs.

This is all base game stuff. Group frame showing names/roles is base game. Screenshot button is base game. Boss health bar is base game. And you can easily count the number of Daedroths that had spawned.

You don't need any addons. You don't need fancy logging or analysis. Yes, he did have Combat Metrics, and if you look closely at the screenshot, you could see the total damage and extrapolate from that what each DD was averaging. But I never did, because the picture spoke for itself. And yes, the group frame showed the character names of these DDs. Again, I did not care, nor did anyone else who looked at the screenshot cared. The screenshot was meant to show what could go wrong in a dungeon PUG. The only times I even pay attention to someone's @ name in a dungeon is if they're really good and as a result I want to get to know them better. Otherwise, I really couldn't care less who they are.

So, again, please answer the question. As far as naming and shaming goes, what does the logging enable that isn't already possible with something as simple as a screenshot showing the total group DPS? Or a Twitch streamer streaming a Group Finder PUG? Or even just someone retelling their experience? All those forum posts that start with, "I was in this dungeon PUG today, and ..."


3. There is more to this than just DPS
Anita asked, rhetorically, if we claim that this tool doesn't add any additional risk of name/shame, then what value does this tool add? Looking at sample uploads at wowlogs and fflogs, it adds a lot. It shows a timeline of the fight. Periods when DPS is low and periods when DPS is high. It showed incoming damage. It shows healing. It shows what enemy abilities are killing players. There's more to a fight than a DPS number. A deeper diagnostic dive into the details of the fight doesn't necessarily mean more shaming.

And I want to also revisit an example that Anita gave earlier in the thread about the FG2 spider lady boss. The one that enrages and becomes harder to kill as her pet spiders die. In that post, ignorance of this mechanic is used as an example of how DPS-centric the game is (I disagree; ignorance of this mechanic is an example of how often people just jump the waterfall and skip this boss in FG2). But this, ironically, is a great example of how such a logging tool would be a great teaching instrument. You would be able to see from the timeline graph that DPS decreases and incoming damage increases when a spider dies. This is actually a reason why real-time in-game reporting could be useful, because someone ignorant of the mechanic is unlikely to be the type of person to go through the trouble of enabling logging and then uploading and examining that log to understand what happened. Which brings me to my final point...


4. This is not a base-game feature
The logging is base-game, yes. But what you do with the log is not. And it is, AFAICT, a bit of a hassle involving a third-party website. As I argued earlier, this is analogous to saying that real-time combat events in the addon API is a base-game feature, but what you do with that (e.g., capturing that information with Combat Metrics) is not. So much of your argument hinges on this being more accessible than existing tools like CMX. I honestly have a hard time believing that. Combat events are always being sent to your game. Logging is not always enabled. I always have Combat Metrics running, so those events are being analyzed in real-time all the time. Of the logs that I do generate, I will only upload a portion of them for analysis--only if something was of particular interest (e.g., a run where I did well that I want to save... or a run that I'm trying to diagnose).

This 100%.

VaranisArano

code65536 wrote: »

anitajoneb17_ESO idk And anyone else who are expressing concerns about this.


1. Let's just agree that the in-game default should be to exclude the character name and to appear anonymous in the logs.
Default should be opt-in, not opt-out, and I agree that people have a right to be upset if it is indeed defaulted to not anonymous and that people have to opt-out. This might already be the case, actually. And if it isn't, I would join you in arguing for it. And I expect that everyone in the raiding community would have no objection to nameless being the default. It seems strange that there is already so much hand-wringing over what a default setting is when that default setting hasn't even been revealed.


2. Regarding name/shame, what scenario does this tool enable that is currently not already possible?
This is a very important question and none of you have been able to answer it.

For example, my friend @Drummerx04 once PUGed a dungeon as a tank. It was vet BC2. The one with the Daedroths that spawn on a timer, and the "hard mode" is to kill the boss with at least three Daedroths alive. The DPS in this group was so low that there were already 7 Daedroths that had spawned by the time the boss reached 83% health. He took a screenshot and shared it in Discord. And in that screenshot, you can see the group frame and see the character names of the tank, healer, and two DDs.

This is all base game stuff. Group frame showing names/roles is base game. Screenshot button is base game. Boss health bar is base game. And you can easily count the number of Daedroths that had spawned.

You don't need any addons. You don't need fancy logging or analysis. Yes, he did have Combat Metrics, and if you look closely at the screenshot, you could see the total damage and extrapolate from that what each DD was averaging. But I never did, because the picture spoke for itself. And yes, the group frame showed the character names of these DDs. Again, I did not care, nor did anyone else who looked at the screenshot cared. The screenshot was meant to show what could go wrong in a dungeon PUG. The only times I even pay attention to someone's @ name in a dungeon is if they're really good and as a result I want to get to know them better. Otherwise, I really couldn't care less who they are.

So, again, please answer the question. As far as naming and shaming goes, what does the logging enable that isn't already possible with something as simple as a screenshot showing the total group DPS? Or a Twitch streamer streaming a Group Finder PUG? Or even just someone retelling their experience? All those forum posts that start with, "I was in this dungeon PUG today, and ..."


3. There is more to this than just DPS
Anita asked, rhetorically, if we claim that this tool doesn't add any additional risk of name/shame, then what value does this tool add? Looking at sample uploads at wowlogs and fflogs, it adds a lot. It shows a timeline of the fight. Periods when DPS is low and periods when DPS is high. It showed incoming damage. It shows healing. It shows what enemy abilities are killing players. There's more to a fight than a DPS number. A deeper diagnostic dive into the details of the fight doesn't necessarily mean more shaming.

And I want to also revisit an example that Anita gave earlier in the thread about the FG2 spider lady boss. The one that enrages and becomes harder to kill as her pet spiders die. In that post, ignorance of this mechanic is used as an example of how DPS-centric the game is (I disagree; ignorance of this mechanic is an example of how often people just jump the waterfall and skip this boss in FG2). But this, ironically, is a great example of how such a logging tool would be a great teaching instrument. You would be able to see from the timeline graph that DPS decreases and incoming damage increases when a spider dies. This is actually a reason why real-time in-game reporting could be useful, because someone ignorant of the mechanic is unlikely to be the type of person to go through the trouble of enabling logging and then uploading and examining that log to understand what happened. Which brings me to my final point...


4. This is not a base-game feature
The logging is base-game, yes. But what you do with the log is not. And it is, AFAICT, a bit of a hassle involving a third-party website. As I argued earlier, this is analogous to saying that real-time combat events in the addon API is a base-game feature, but what you do with that (e.g., capturing that information with Combat Metrics) is not. So much of your argument hinges on this being more accessible than existing tools like CMX. I honestly have a hard time believing that. Combat events are always being sent to your game. Logging is not always enabled. I always have Combat Metrics running, so those events are being analyzed in real-time all the time. Of the logs that I do generate, I will only upload a portion of them for analysis--only if something was of particular interest (e.g., a run where I did well that I want to save... or a run that I'm trying to diagnose).

I would agree, with the caveat that, from what was said on this thread by Kihra regarding the program, it seems that privacy and anonymity was not the default.

I hope that changes as both ZOS and the people at ESO Logs listen to the desires of ALL their players, not just those who are comfortable with having their parse and character names logged by default.

idk

Zos could have put the true opt out in game so that it permitted the buff info to pass through but nothing else. Instead Zos chose to leave that to a third party that can change hands and how they do things.

I really do not understand why so many are defending Zos' laziness in this matter. t would not hurt use of the tool in any manner as it would not hinder core progression teams from using this tool to it's fullest extent.

It really seems as though some are circling th e

code65536 wrote: »

@anitajoneb17_ESO @idk And anyone else who are expressing concerns about this.


1. Let's just agree that the in-game default should be to exclude the character name and to appear anonymous in the logs.
Default should be opt-in, not opt-out, and I agree that people have a right to be upset if it is indeed defaulted to not anonymous and that people have to opt-out. This might already be the case, actually. And if it isn't, I would join you in arguing for it. And I expect that everyone in the raiding community would have no objection to nameless being the default. It seems strange that there is already so much hand-wringing over what a default setting is when that default setting hasn't even been revealed.


2. Regarding name/shame, what scenario does this tool enable that is currently not already possible?
This is a very important question and none of you have been able to answer it.

For example, my friend @Drummerx04 once PUGed a dungeon as a tank. It was vet BC2. The one with the Daedroths that spawn on a timer, and the "hard mode" is to kill the boss with at least three Daedroths alive. The DPS in this group was so low that there were already 7 Daedroths that had spawned by the time the boss reached 83% health. He took a screenshot and shared it in Discord. And in that screenshot, you can see the group frame and see the character names of the tank, healer, and two DDs.

This is all base game stuff. Group frame showing names/roles is base game. Screenshot button is base game. Boss health bar is base game. And you can easily count the number of Daedroths that had spawned.

You don't need any addons. You don't need fancy logging or analysis. Yes, he did have Combat Metrics, and if you look closely at the screenshot, you could see the total damage and extrapolate from that what each DD was averaging. But I never did, because the picture spoke for itself. And yes, the group frame showed the character names of these DDs. Again, I did not care, nor did anyone else who looked at the screenshot cared. The screenshot was meant to show what could go wrong in a dungeon PUG. The only times I even pay attention to someone's @ name in a dungeon is if they're really good and as a result I want to get to know them better. Otherwise, I really couldn't care less who they are.

So, again, please answer the question. As far as naming and shaming goes, what does the logging enable that isn't already possible with something as simple as a screenshot showing the total group DPS? Or a Twitch streamer streaming a Group Finder PUG? Or even just someone retelling their experience? All those forum posts that start with, "I was in this dungeon PUG today, and ..."


3. There is more to this than just DPS
Anita asked, rhetorically, if we claim that this tool doesn't add any additional risk of name/shame, then what value does this tool add? Looking at sample uploads at wowlogs and fflogs, it adds a lot. It shows a timeline of the fight. Periods when DPS is low and periods when DPS is high. It showed incoming damage. It shows healing. It shows what enemy abilities are killing players. There's more to a fight than a DPS number. A deeper diagnostic dive into the details of the fight doesn't necessarily mean more shaming.

And I want to also revisit an example that Anita gave earlier in the thread about the FG2 spider lady boss. The one that enrages and becomes harder to kill as her pet spiders die. In that post, ignorance of this mechanic is used as an example of how DPS-centric the game is (I disagree; ignorance of this mechanic is an example of how often people just jump the waterfall and skip this boss in FG2). But this, ironically, is a great example of how such a logging tool would be a great teaching instrument. You would be able to see from the timeline graph that DPS decreases and incoming damage increases when a spider dies. This is actually a reason why real-time in-game reporting could be useful, because someone ignorant of the mechanic is unlikely to be the type of person to go through the trouble of enabling logging and then uploading and examining that log to understand what happened. Which brings me to my final point...


4. This is not a base-game feature
The logging is base-game, yes. But what you do with the log is not. And it is, AFAICT, a bit of a hassle involving a third-party website. As I argued earlier, this is analogous to saying that real-time combat events in the addon API is a base-game feature, but what you do with that (e.g., capturing that information with Combat Metrics) is not. So much of your argument hinges on this being more accessible than existing tools like CMX. I honestly have a hard time believing that. Combat events are always being sent to your game. Logging is not always enabled. I always have Combat Metrics running, so those events are being analyzed in real-time all the time. Of the logs that I do generate, I will only upload a portion of them for analysis--only if something was of particular interest (e.g., a run where I did well that I want to save... or a run that I'm trying to diagnose).

These are not reasons Zos' choices. They are just excuses for Zos' laziness leaving a true opt out to a third party instead of putting it in game.

Yes, it is a base game feature to save the data. It is a third party to actually read the data. A third party Zos has no true control over, can change hands and that true opt out Zos is leaving to them could change.

I am not arguing against the tool as I can see the benefits to the small percentage of the game the raids seriously. Zos could have provided the full opt out in game that a third party said they would do at the site. They chose not to or did not really care.

It just seems some are supporting the laziness from Zos because they want the tool and could care less about anyone or anything else.

Idinuse

FatalForce wrote: »

So let me break this down @Idinuse

Idinuse wrote: »

My god what an elitist tone you have in your condescending attitude to anyone not interested in the elitist circle jerking and e-peen measuring.

So you call me condescending, without actually saying why I am, or what exactly you disagree with; then resort to labeling the end game raiding scene as 'elitist circle jerking and e-peen measuring'. It may be just me, but I would never label someone as such without actually knowing that person. I've raided competitively a long time, and you're 100% correct that there are some people that are as you so describe, however I think my past actions in the game and the people I've played with speak for themselves and you would be hard pressed to find a person, let alone several, that would classify me as such.

Let's assume you weren't directing that at me personally (though you quoted my post, then said I had an elitest tone), where do you get off labeling people that like to enjoy the game by playing it to the best of their capabilities as elitest circle jerking players? That's pretty absurd to generalize. I'm genuinely curious to how many of the end-game raiders you've actually talked to, because as it's been stated here multiple times, the majority of the top of the top are actually really nice players. You might want to put down your pitchfork and have a chat with some of us.

"[A]nd frankly I think this is willfully ignorant of other peoples goals and desires in the game. It really feels like you simply want to be upset for the sole purpose of being upset."

Yes I find this a condescending attitude - to assume someone that does not share your interest is "willfully ignorant of other peoples goals and desires" and "simply wants to be upset for the sole purpose of being upset" while ignoring other peoples goals and desires that do not comply to yours.

FatalForce wrote: »

Idinuse wrote: »

The tools that exist are perfectly suitable for raids and players to improve.

You are 100% correct, they are suitable for raids and players to improve; however this tool though collecting similar/the same information does so, and presents the data, in a different manner. I've read several people bringing up the point of, if this is the same information as CMX then why bother with it. The answer to this is that it's on a different scale than what CMX currently reports. CMX will log, in great detail, the entire combat log of an encounter. That specific encounter then gets aggregated and presented in a window with damage done by a person to specific targets, heals per second, debuffs, buffs, etc. This is done on a per combat encounter basis. The tool that is being presented will present similar (a lot of the same information) but with the ability to not only see on a per fight basis, but also on a per trial/dungeon basis giving you a much broader scope at how you are doing. To do this now requires a person to print screen every CMX from every person in the group and aggregate all that information by hand. Alternatively, you can use Hodor Reflexes while recording your game play, then go back and watch your video and manually enter how everyone in the group was doing into an excel sheet, then manually manipulate all that data yourself. I've done this, it's the best we have; but it's a painstakingly difficult way to analyze how a group is doing. This tool will effectively automate that process. The person that is handling the website has done this for multiple different MMO's, it's that persons livelihood by making money off of advertisements, etc. In this regard, that person probably is the world expert on handling this type of information, and instead of ZoS reinventing the wheel here, they turned to external help to leverage that persons knowledge.

Making money off of players personal data in game is even more of a dilemma. Don't get me wrong. I personally don't care, but this is something that needs to be handled with care. I don't care what's going on or what has happened in any other game. I don't have agreements with those game developers or service providers.

I find it rather strange that Zos cares about lottery laws in my country, excluding me from contests and lotteries in game, but seems to don't give a damn about my country's privacy laws. You can't just agree away laws - neither in regards to me or the party I sign an agreement with. But legal or not this is also about simply respecting a customer base's privacy and not forcing upon them a measuring stock made public of their performance.

FatalForce wrote: »

Idinuse wrote: »

Publicly making private in game data, or even gathering it, about a player (actions taken, damage or hot done) or absence there of public must be some sort of privacy breach that needs to be looked at imo. This sort of data gathering about a player does not fall in good soil with EU law without it being opting in, I can tell you that. https://www.gdpreu.org/compliance/fines-and-penalties/

This is getting to peoples concerns about this violating privacy laws. This person has done the leaderboards for WoW and FF to name a few, I'm pretty sure if there was any legal issues with this they would have surfaced by now on other platforms. I really doubt there is any issue with such laws, or those other log sites would have been taken down a long time ago. There was another comment about how no other addon collects players names/characters names and what they do in game and displays it externally, which is false. There is esoleaderboards.com which gathers all the leaderboard scores in game and displays them, this archives all scores for PC NA and EU.

Again it's utterly irrelevant what other games do or don't, we don't have agreements with them. It's funny how when someone asks for some kind of shiny that is in i.e. WoW people tend to reply "this isn't Wow, if yo want that go play Wow."

Well they are right. This isn't WoW or FF.

FatalForce wrote: »

Idinuse wrote: »

This kind of "service" needs to be consciously enabled by choice. The rest of the elite PvE community can continue using CMX and Hodor addons or just make the optimal e-peen measure/bully generator add for yourselves and keep using it without forcing it upon the entire player base.

I would personally agree, that by default the sharing should be forced to be defaulted to opting IN. I also wouldn't see any issues with preventing a group from reporting at all unless EVERY person in that group enables it.

I very much agree with you on that. See, this is where the service/web site becomes the tool I think you all that are for it see (well I'm not against it per se). A tool for a group of players that all consent to using it and have use of it as intended.

FatalForce wrote: »

Idinuse wrote: »

The attitude of the Class Representatives and the sniffy attitude towards the average (and majority) player makes me think I understand some strange balancing decisions lately.

Instead of generically complaining about class reps and a 'sniffy attitude towards the average player', can you instead articulate why you feel slighted, or what can be done to help this?

I don't personally feel slighted, where did I say that? But what you can do is take a respectful approach and attitude to players that are not in the high endgame community and not drop insulting assumptions about them just because they don't share your end game goals or interests.

FatalForce wrote: »

Idinuse wrote: »

Considering how serious Zos is in regards of "naming and shaming" and publicly making a name appear in screenshots and vid caps here on a Forum you need an invite to join, and then making something like this publicly available is, as I see it, rather mind blowing.

I will assume ZoS will make the smart choice and force people to opt-in, in this manner there is no such public naming and shaming unless you choose to enable it. You are otherwise anonymous with the only ability to remove that anonymity by having someone in the run take a screenshot, got to that run on the website, and then cross out names that are listed to find the last person. As I, and multiple others have stated, this can already be done with current tools (in a real-time manner) and in practice, doesn't happen.

Yes an opt in and unmissable information about the "service" needs to be in the game. The current in game options for this is not an automated data collecting that within seconds, even without a players knowledge, can be made publicly available on a third party website. The option is to screen cap it and make it publicly available and doing just that here on this Forum is against the TOS.

For the most part it seems we agree, with just minor deviations, but nothing grave.

And again. I'll have this option enabled for sure, and I'll be using the website myself. But it's of no interest overall considering the general concerns I have about this data gathering/ranking website combination.

karthrag_inak

Masel wrote: »

As I said above: this tool will not make it easier to judge people. CMX is a much easier way to judge people based on their actions and performance while it is happening.

It doesn't have to actually make it easier to judge people, it only has to make it -look- like it's easier to judge people, and folks are going to be dissuaded from participating.

And frankly, it has achieved that (looking like it's easier to "weed out the nubs").

code65536

idk wrote: »

Zos could have put the true opt out in game so that it permitted the buff info to pass through but nothing else. Instead Zos chose to leave that to a third party that can change hands and how they do things.

I really do not understand why so many are defending Zos' laziness in this matter. t would not hurt use of the tool in any manner as it would not hinder core progression teams from using this tool to it's fullest extent.

Because once you exclude that level of information, the data becomes meaningless. The "opt-out" that I'm talking about is simply redacting the name. So that you appear as "anonymous". What you want is impossible. It's not laziness. It's simple nonsensical impossibility. "Hey, the dungeon boss's health went from 50% to 25% in the span of a minute, which means the total group DPS is 60K, and if Alice there did 40K, then we can guess what Bob did." You can never get rid of that. You will never be able to get rid of it, unless you lobotomize so much data that the data becomes meaningless.

The anonymization that we are talking about is in the game itself, as I understand it. If someone chooses to be anonymous in the log (which I would argue should be the default), then the logs produced by anyone would not have their name.

"But what about extrapolating who they are based on who isn't anonymized?" As I said, you can't get rid of that. You call it laziness, but I call it common sense that it's an a priori impossibility. But, more importantly, this sort of extrapolative identification is already possible. In a dungeon, if a DD takes a screenshot with their CMX status panel saying that they are doing 60% of the group DPS, we already know that the other person is doing at most 40%. In a trial, if 7 DDs share their DPS and the 8th doesn't, people who care enough can do the math and determine what that 8th did. If only 6 DDs share, you can't determine what the last two did individually, just as here, if just two people choose to be anonymous, that extrapolative identification breaks down. How is that any different? How is any of this any worse than the example that I had given earlier of the screenshot?

(Aside: What is with this obsession with DPS? Honestly, when I first heard about this, my first thought was "new tool to figure out how mechanics work and why we wiped!" Measuring DPS didn't even cross my mind until the uproar in this thread over what are, frankly, speculative threats.)

karthrag_inak

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

karthrag_inak wrote: »

Masel wrote: »

To the players criticising this tool: what are you afraid of?

For me its the perception of being easily judged ending up discouraging new folks from engaging in group activities, impeding their progress toward getting better, and subsequently diminishing the future pool of good players. Besides, doing dungeons and trials with folks i never met before is how i've met some of my best in-game friends.

You will be judged to a bigger extent if you're in a group with me and my CMX shows me that I'm doing 80% of dps...by the way that happens to me every time I pug and I never say anything to the person, I just help the group get better. You are afraid of a tool that doesnt introduce anything new to the casual players, but serves as an amazing tool for those trying to improve. You are also afraid of something that already exists in real time and does much more damage to groups than the logs - CMX

I'm not afraid of anything, i do just fine, thank you very much, and i'm not a casual player. I'm saying why I don't support this thing because of how it will be perceived by the masses of casual players who are otherwise cool folks buy who may not want to subject themselves to the criticism by folks who don't necessarily even know what they are reading.

among these same folks are the great players of tomorrow, if they are given an opportunity to grow and learn. this name-and-shame tool is not the way that opportunity is going to come about.

code65536

karthrag_inak wrote: »

It doesn't have to actually make it easier to judge people, it only has to make it -look- like it's easier to judge people, and folks are going to be dissuaded from participating.

So, instead of arguing on the facts and merits at hand, you are arguing on perception. A perception that you are fostering. You are attempting to create a self-fulfilling prophecy (or, if I were to be less charitable in my word choice, FUD).

hedna123b14_ESO

@FatalForce "[A]nd frankly I think this is willfully ignorant of other peoples goals and desires in the game. It really feels like you simply want to be upset for the sole purpose of being upset."

@Idinuse "My god what an elitist tone you have in your condescending attitude to anyone not interested in the elitist circle jerking and e-peen measuring."

Pot calling the Kettle black

Idinuse

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

@FatalForce "[A]nd frankly I think this is willfully ignorant of other peoples goals and desires in the game. It really feels like you simply want to be upset for the sole purpose of being upset."

@Idinuse "My god what an elitist tone you have in your condescending attitude to anyone not interested in the elitist circle jerking and e-peen measuring."

Pot calling the Kettle black

Are you for real? Really? The first sentence in my previous post is a quote from FatalForce. Jesus. SMH

Edit*

FatalForce wrote: »

...and frankly I think this is willfully ignorant of other peoples goals and desires in the game. It really feels like you simply want to be upset for the sole purpose of being upset.

FatalForce

@karthrag_inak but you are assuming the masses don't want this tool, do you have data to prove that? I'd be really interested to see a pole where it shows the majority of players have no desire to improve and thus don't want, nor would benefit, from this tool. If you don't have such information, you are simply generalizing and injecting your own opinions but labeling them as facts.

I can just as easily say, the masses of casual players will love this tool as it will help them improve their play by analyzing their own performance with respect to other people. This tool is a great opportunity for them to grown and learn as you suggest be given to them.

This tool can, theoretically, be used as a name and shame tool. However, as it has been said a plethora of times on here; it's completely possible to do so without this tool (and in a much more impactfull way through live feedback of combat metrics). In my experience this is rarely ever done. If you have other experiences where you can show this happening, I'd gladly like to hear about it.

karthrag_inak

code65536 wrote: »

So, instead of arguing on the facts and merits at hand, you are arguing on perception. A perception that you are fostering. You are attempting to create a self-fulfilling prophecy (or, if I were to be less charitable in my word choice, FUD).

of course i'm arguing on perception -that's the issue here. It's hard enough to get folks to do vet content now, without the added -perception- that everyone is going to see their dirty underpants.

as for what i'm fostering... yeah, right. i'm the one fostering the perception that the tool that is going to record and broadcast someone's combat performance just might be used to make them look like a fool. after all, nobody in their right mind would read the original post in this thread and think that that's what this will be used for.

idk

code65536 wrote: »

idk wrote: »

Zos could have put the true opt out in game so that it permitted the buff info to pass through but nothing else. Instead Zos chose to leave that to a third party that can change hands and how they do things.

I really do not understand why so many are defending Zos' laziness in this matter. t would not hurt use of the tool in any manner as it would not hinder core progression teams from using this tool to it's fullest extent.

Because once you exclude that level of information, the data becomes meaningless. The "opt-out" that I'm talking about is simply redacting the name. So that you appear as "anonymous". What you want is impossible. It's not laziness. It's simple nonsensical impossibility. "Hey, the dungeon boss's health went from 50% to 25% in the span of a minute, which means the total group DPS is 60K, and if Alice there did 40K, then we can guess what Bob did." You can never get rid of that. You will never be able to get rid of it, unless you lobotomize so much data that the data becomes meaningless.

The anonymization that we are talking about is in the game itself, as I understand it. If someone chooses to be anonymous in the log (which I would argue should be the default), then the logs produced by anyone would not have their name.

"But what about extrapolating who they are based on who isn't anonymized?" As I said, you can't get rid of that. You call it laziness, but I call it common sense that it's an a priori impossibility. But, more importantly, this sort of extrapolative identification is already possible. In a dungeon, if a DD takes a screenshot with their CMX status panel saying that they are doing 60% of the group DPS, we already know that the other person is doing at most 40%. In a trial, if 7 DDs share their DPS and the 8th doesn't, people who care enough can do the math and determine what that 8th did. If only 6 DDs share, you can't determine what the last two did individually, just as here, if just two people choose to be anonymous, that extrapolative identification breaks down. How is that any different? How is any of this any worse than the example that I had given earlier of the screenshot?

(Aside: What is with this obsession with DPS? Honestly, when I first heard about this, my first thought was "new tool to figure out how mechanics work and why we wiped!" Measuring DPS didn't even cross my mind until the uproar in this thread over what are, frankly, speculative threats.)

My guess is you do some serious raiding based on many of your posts in these forums. I think you can pretty much surmise that serious raid groups would require players be opted in to raid with them which means your point that the data would become meaningless for those groups does not hold up to the smell test.

What I want is not impossible. @Kihra states on the second page that we can fully opt out at the website and all information except buffs will not be seen. If it can be done at the website the opt out in game can handle it as well. It is just categorizing the data in the database appropriately. I am not saying that is simple coding, but in reality it could be as easy as adding a new field and coding buffs as 1 and damage as 0.

I am also fully aware of what combat metrics can do as everyone who does any bit of serious raiding uses it. We are not talking about CMX in this thread, there are groups beyond 4 man and CMX seems to be used in this topic as a distraction.

In the end, I respect you. Have seen some great thoughts posted by you in the forums and know you make some great addons for raiding. I just think there is a better way that the opt out can be done and I guess you are just more concerned it could harm this new tool.

karthrag_inak

FatalForce wrote: »

@karthrag_inak but you are assuming the masses don't want this tool, do you have data to prove that? I'd be really interested to see a pole where it shows the majority of players have no desire to improve and thus don't want, nor would benefit, from this tool. If you don't have such information, you are simply generalizing and injecting your own opinions but labeling them as facts.

I can just as easily say, the masses of casual players will love this tool as it will help them improve their play by analyzing their own performance with respect to other people. This tool is a great opportunity for them to grown and learn as you suggest be given to them.

This tool can, theoretically, be used as a name and shame tool. However, as it has been said a plethora of times on here; it's completely possible to do so without this tool (and in a much more impactfull way through live feedback of combat metrics). In my experience this is rarely ever done. If you have other experiences where you can show this happening, I'd gladly like to hear about it.

heh. you're funny, i like you.

karthrag_inak

ZOS_BobbyWeir wrote: »

You may remember that years ago, our addon API unintentionally allowed the ability to show group combat data in real time. While we saw a merit in this as tool, we disabled that capability due to the potential for misuse with having this information readily accessible in the game and in real time. Encounter logging provides a deep look into the same data, but external to the game and not in true real time. We believe these distinctions will swing the balance back towards using a tool like this for constructive purposes rather than nefarious ones.

To those folks who think this will not be seen as something unpleasant by the bajillion folks in this game who aren't "l33t like j00", recognize that the only benefit this system has over the older version is the lack of immediacy.

So apparently the ability to alt-tab and upload/observe is, somehow, some kind of barrier to the otherwise "potential for misuse"? Seriously? You guys can't see this might be an issue? I can't imagine that wouldn't be trivial to build a plugin to automate the upload and then subsequent perusal of the uploaded data to effectively share in game and "name&shame" - seems comparable to the functionality in TTC.

Look, I personally like the ability to have additional data - one of my gripes about ESO is that all my combat info is obfuscated - i like numbers. I also like having folks to play with, good folks, or those wanting to get good, or even crappy folks who just want to have fun and are willing to try things out. I don't see any way that this tool will help that, and I see quite a few ways that this tool will hurt it.

code65536

idk wrote: »

My guess is you do some serious raiding based on many of your posts in these forums. I think you can pretty much surmise that serious raid groups would require players be opted in to raid with them which means your point that the data would become meaningless for those groups does not hold up to the smell test.

As I understand it, you want it to report show buffs/debuffs and not the DPS. And I'm arguing that's a bit nonsensical, because you can extrapolate things like the total group DPS by just taking the boss health divided by the duration of the fight. And then once you have the total group DPS, you can extrapolate further. Extrapolation will only be rendered impossible if so much data is excluded that you might as well not log.

idk wrote: »

What I want is not impossible. @Kihra states on the second page that we can fully opt out at the website and all information except buffs will not be seen.

I've read that post, and I believe you have misunderstood what it means. You can choose for your character's name to never appear in a log, in which case you will merely appear as anonymous. And, if your character's name is included, you can hide it after the fact on the website, e.g., by claiming the character. Nowhere does it say that it'll be possible to exclude one type of data.

idk wrote: »

We are not talking about CMX in this thread, there are groups beyond 4 man and CMX seems to be used in this topic as a distraction.

It's not a distraction. Rather, as a baseline of what is already possible in regards to exposing players. We are merely asking that you demonstrate how this facility will go beyond CMX in that regard.

idk wrote: »

I just think there is a better way that the opt out can be done and I guess you are just more concerned it could harm this new tool.

I'm just confused by why people are upset with this. It looks like it will be a great tool, and I am honestly having a hard time envisioning the kinds of abuse that people are afraid of. Which, again, is why I am bringing up CMX--not as a distraction, but as a point of comparison to what is already possible in terms of toxic usage.

In the end, I think the best compromise solution is to have two options:

Allow Encounter Logging: On/Off [default: On]
-- Show character name in Encounter Logs: On/Off [default: Off]

If anyone in the group has "Allow encounter logging" set to "Off", any attempt to turn on Encounter Logging by anyone will produce the error message, "Someone in your group has disallowed Encounter Logging", and then the logger could then request that group members turn it on.

This way would produce two levels of control. Anonymity should be the default. But for people who are not satisfied with just having anonymity, I would not be opposed to letting them effectively veto Encounter Logging for the entire group. But I hope that people will give it a try, and that they will see the value of these analytics and that they come to the realization that anonymization renders their fears and concerns unfounded, and that there really isn't a need exercise such a veto. But if it allays people's initial fears, then, sure add a veto.

DyingIsEasy

idk wrote: »

code65536 wrote: »

idk wrote: »

Zos could have put the true opt out in game so that it permitted the buff info to pass through but nothing else. Instead Zos chose to leave that to a third party that can change hands and how they do things.

I really do not understand why so many are defending Zos' laziness in this matter. t would not hurt use of the tool in any manner as it would not hinder core progression teams from using this tool to it's fullest extent.

Because once you exclude that level of information, the data becomes meaningless. The "opt-out" that I'm talking about is simply redacting the name. So that you appear as "anonymous". What you want is impossible. It's not laziness. It's simple nonsensical impossibility. "Hey, the dungeon boss's health went from 50% to 25% in the span of a minute, which means the total group DPS is 60K, and if Alice there did 40K, then we can guess what Bob did." You can never get rid of that. You will never be able to get rid of it, unless you lobotomize so much data that the data becomes meaningless.

The anonymization that we are talking about is in the game itself, as I understand it. If someone chooses to be anonymous in the log (which I would argue should be the default), then the logs produced by anyone would not have their name.

"But what about extrapolating who they are based on who isn't anonymized?" As I said, you can't get rid of that. You call it laziness, but I call it common sense that it's an a priori impossibility. But, more importantly, this sort of extrapolative identification is already possible. In a dungeon, if a DD takes a screenshot with their CMX status panel saying that they are doing 60% of the group DPS, we already know that the other person is doing at most 40%. In a trial, if 7 DDs share their DPS and the 8th doesn't, people who care enough can do the math and determine what that 8th did. If only 6 DDs share, you can't determine what the last two did individually, just as here, if just two people choose to be anonymous, that extrapolative identification breaks down. How is that any different? How is any of this any worse than the example that I had given earlier of the screenshot?

(Aside: What is with this obsession with DPS? Honestly, when I first heard about this, my first thought was "new tool to figure out how mechanics work and why we wiped!" Measuring DPS didn't even cross my mind until the uproar in this thread over what are, frankly, speculative threats.)

My guess is you do some serious raiding based on many of your posts in these forums. I think you can pretty much surmise that serious raid groups would require players be opted in to raid with them which means your point that the data would become meaningless for those groups does not hold up to the smell test.

What I want is not impossible. @Kihra states on the second page that we can fully opt out at the website and all information except buffs will not be seen. If it can be done at the website the opt out in game can handle it as well. It is just categorizing the data in the database appropriately. I am not saying that is simple coding, but in reality it could be as easy as adding a new field and coding buffs as 1 and damage as 0.

I am also fully aware of what combat metrics can do as everyone who does any bit of serious raiding uses it. We are not talking about CMX in this thread, there are groups beyond 4 man and CMX seems to be used in this topic as a distraction.

In the end, I respect you. Have seen some great thoughts posted by you in the forums and know you make some great addons for raiding. I just think there is a better way that the opt out can be done and I guess you are just more concerned it could harm this new tool.

@idk

CMX is not used as a distraction. The point is that you could implement the same website using just CMX. This has the added benefit that only one person needs to upload the data.

So i guess the question is: Why do you think this is such a big deal but not CMX?