New Achievement Concept: Damage Per Second

Colecovision · February 2018

Why not insist everyone show up with the maelstrom conquerer title? It's already in the game. Seems like 4 - 12 vMA champs should be able to get HM done if they work together. Or is that still not enough of a litmus test?

LadyLethalla · February 2018

Oh right, so these would just be another set of achievements I can never get due to my Potato Internet? How about NO?

kargen27 · February 2018

LordSemaj wrote: »

kongkim wrote: »

I actually am thinking of others with my opinion on adding yet another roadblock to getting into a group. If this is put in place we will see in zone chat "looking for group for AA run, must have XXX CP and XX DPS." That makes it harder for people to join the group and that is not good for the game.

This is what I feel is incorrect. Previously, before CP, people used achievements to determine whether you were allowed into the group. That was replaced with the CP measure and opened the doors to more people being able to join. A new measure simply replaces the old because no one wants to stand there spamming extra requirements and end up not finding anyone who meets the criteria. CP doesn't matter, it was mentioned many times in this thread and the other one I linked. DPS matters and CP is used as a measure of it because it's the best anyone has access to. Even people with high CP can fail, even people with high DPS can die, but that isn't why the minimums exist. They exist for DPS and to ensure there will be enough of it to clear the dungeon and overcome the boss mechanics. A failure is a failure with or without either which is why this is an attempt at measuring the worth of a player.

CP matters as much as DPS parses matter, not at all. Neither is a good indication of how you will perform when in a dungeon. As Bruce Lee once reminded us "boards don't hit back".

Very few bosses have a DPS check and those that do get ugly quick when one of the DPS dies and another DPS needs to raise them. This absolutely is an attempt at measuring a player. Assigning a title based on a number is pretty much covered in the definition of measuring.

"They exist for DPS and to ensure there will be enough..." That is measuring a player. It is measuring a player on a number that is arbitrary and can't be duplicated outside the test dummy environment. There are builds available that will do more DPS on a parse if the dummy is moved to a confined area. There are builds that will let you easily hit 20K+ DPS without bar swapping. A DPS parse is not a good nor reliable way to decide who can and can not join a group. You admit that yourself. So why add something that fixes nothing and creates more problems/grief?

[minor edit for quote]

DoctorESO · February 2018

.

Stovahkiin · February 2018

starkerealm wrote: »

It'd make life more annoying, honestly. There's plenty of players who can pull 30k on a dummy parse, but have 10k health and will die if the boss looks at them funny. But, it would lead to more elitism from players who are borderline competent to begin with.

This

Eatmyface · February 2018

Would anyone EVER change their title from "The Penetrator"??

I sure as hell wouldn't.

LordSemaj · February 2018

kargen27 wrote: »

CP matters as much as DPS parses matter, not at all. Neither is a good indication of how you will perform when in a dungeon. As Bruce Lee once reminded us "boards don't hit back".

Thankfully it's not being used as an indication of performance in a dungeon. It's being used to verify a statistical value parallel to common normality. You're the one suggesting it be used as an indication of performance while others use it an indication of what it actually is: a DPS test. Boards don't hit back so it's an ideal test setting without any distractions or data pollution, raw results. No one expects such things during an actual dungeon run.

kargen27 wrote: »

Very few bosses have a DPS check and those that do get ugly quick when one of the DPS dies and another DPS needs to raise them. This absolutely is an attempt at measuring a player. Assigning a title based on a number is pretty much covered in the definition of measuring.

You can keep repeating that it is an attempt at measuring a player all you'd like. The bosses that do have a DPS check get ugly when a DPS dies? Heck, every boss gets ugly when a DPS dies. It gets uglier when half the group is dead too. The more deaths, the closer to a wipe. Yet the bosses that bear a DPS check are quite literally impossible to do unless that DPS is present, far beyond ugly, and since a DPS test doesn't check someone's survival rate, and neither does CP, that isn't the goal of checking for or requiring either.

kargen27 wrote: »

"They exist for DPS and to ensure there will be enough..." That is measuring a player. It is measuring a player on a number that is arbitrary and can't be duplicated outside the test dummy environment. There are builds available that will do more DPS on a parse if the dummy is moved to a confined area. There are builds that will let you easily hit 20K+ DPS without bar swapping. A DPS parse is not a good nor reliable way to decide who can and can not join a group. You admit that yourself. So why add something that fixes nothing and creates more problems/grief?

If you can do it without bar swapping, then do it. No one cares how you achieved it. Only that you did. Demonstrate that capacity in any means you see fit. If numerous people are able to effortlessly achieve numbers, the metrics may rise or it may be enough that they understand how rotations work. Again, we're aware that it's arbitrary. CP is already arbitrary. No one suggested that the tests fix anything, you can't fix bad players to begin with and you're already going to spot them when the run begins.

The one and only thing the tests provide is precisely what's in their name, a basically simple fact that it's a measure of DPS - raw, ideal, vacuum sealed, and theoretical.

ZOS_CoriJ · February 2018

We've removed a handful of posts and are reopening this thread since there seems to be a lot of good debate on the subject. However we feel that this thread has also facilitated abrasive commentary. Please keep posts from getting personal to prove any points from either side of the topic. If this cannot be followed we will be closing the thread.

LordSemaj · February 2018

ZOS_CoriJ wrote: »

We've removed a handful of posts and are reopening this thread since there seems to be a lot of good debate on the subject. However we feel that this thread has also facilitated abrasive commentary. Please keep posts from getting personal to prove any points from either side of the topic. If this cannot be followed we will be closing the thread.

You missed a few spots. Speaking of arbitrary...

starkerealm · February 2018

Eatmyface wrote: »

Would anyone EVER change their title from "The Penetrator"??

I sure as hell wouldn't.

People used to run around with the "Moist" title in Star Trek Online, before it got pulled. (Though, I think characters that got originally still have it.) I really don't try to think about what's going on when people pick their titles.

BlackEar · February 2018

I don't think this will promote the kind of experience we want.

starkerealm · February 2018

kongkim wrote: »

No thx. Bad idea. You can already see the elitism in here that people will have you to do 20k DPS.
I have done all Vet dungeons in the game and is just above 10k on my best toon.

It should be pretty easy to get you up to 15k before animation canceling or worrying about a precise rotation in a live situation.

If you're on PC a buff tracker like S'Rendarr or AUI can help you manage your active status effects. Part of this might be a gear situation, but cleaning up your build should bring your DPS up substantially. Keep an eye out for abilities that provide buffs. For example, things like Brutality, Berserk, and Sorcery can be very nice to have. How you get these varies. Also, if your ultimate is primarily for outgoing damage, then Heroism can help you speed up ultimate gain.

The usual gear advice still carries. Sharpened is no longer absolute best in slot, but it is a solid choice, and that penetration will improve your damage against enemies, though getting pen from other sources is an option. Spinners (for Magicka) and Spriggans (for Stam) are the usual recommendations here, and if you're willing to go hunting for them, that's probably worth your time.

Also, if you're running with a consistent group, talk to each other. Being able to have someone apply Fracture and Breach to the boss can help a ton. (This should be happening, but you never know.) If your tank is using crushing enchants that will help further. Sets like Sunderflame and Night Mother's Gaze can excel in group content, where the player sacrifices some personal DPS to increase the outgoing damage, team wide, but you don't want two players using duplicate sets and overriding each other's debuffs. Also, for DPS, the healer running Spell Power Cure is a godsend.

Unless you have a specific build in mind, I'd avoid sets that modify specific damage types or weapons, like Netch's Touch, Silks of the Sun, Automaton, Spider Cultist, Sword Dancer's, War Maiden's and so many others. These can be very good in carefully tuned builds, but Hunding's and Julianos will outperform them under a wider range of circumstances. (Also, avoid Vampire Lord like the plague for the moment. War Maiden's is the same set, but it affects more skills.)

One big thing, if you've got a weapon you're actually committed to for your build, upgrade it to gold. Getting the rest of your gear to gold is nice, but far less important.

Try to make sure that you're completing as many sets as possible. Or, that you're considering the pieces of the sets that will actually be active. For example, if you're using Hunding's, make sure you complete it, before starting on a second set. Some simple intro builds would take a 5pc bonus with Chest, Belt, Legs, Gloves, and Boots, mix it with a 3pc Jewelry set like Agility or Willpower, then stack a monster set, head/shoulders, and finish it off with appropriate unique weapons (Asylum, Maelstrom, or Master), however, having a 5pc set with Jewelry and weapons (DW or S&B) is also a legitimate option. However, in cases like this, you need to be careful about the weapon sets, because some buffs, particularly stat increases, will momentarily break when bar swapping, which can result in you loosing health, stam, or magicka. In the case of Ebon Armory, completing it with a weapon can effectively deal 1k damage to your entire party when you swap. (In this case, it may be worth it to stack sets like Julianos with sets like Silks of the Sun or War Maiden's, if you're sticking to the appropriate damage condition primarily, though again, I'd be cautious to recommend this.)

RobbieRocket · February 2018

This is like owning a sports car (think supercar: Porsche, Ferrari, Lamborghini, etc.).

Impressive to look at but a bit of "compensation pyschology".

Furthermore, it doesn't mean that the driver can handle the vehicle at high speeds (under pressure to perform), that they are a decent driver (dealing with mechanics) or able to avoid crashing on tight corners (vet dungeon flop).

starkerealm · February 2018

RobbieRocket wrote: »

This is like owning a sports car (think supercar: Porsche, Ferrari, Lamborghini, etc.).

Impressive to look at but a bit of "compensation pyschology".

Furthermore, it doesn't mean that the driver can handle the vehicle at high speeds (under pressure to perform), that they are a decent driver (dealing with mechanics) or able to avoid crashing on tight corners (vet dungeon flop).

Yeah, this is a fair analogy to builds in ESO. A lot of it comes down to your ability to actually play it, rather than your build. I mean it sounds kinda goofy, but it's appropriate.

randomkeyhits · February 2018

The original post has a simple and basic flaw in that its a point in time thing.

You achieved < thing > with < gear set > and < skills >.

Are you wearing that same gear and using the same rotation now? Have the skills/gearsets been buffed/nerfed/reworked?

If the achievement is older than say six weeks then it has a very limited value as a player measure method.

As for the must-do-parse crowd, well..... its their groups, their rules. If you don't like it, form your own based on the things you value, there are plenty of players out there who could do trials but don't because the whole "dance for me" shenanigans is a massive turn off.

I would fall into the try the first boss crowd myself, I consider group content to be a social thing first (ie for fun), even if competitive. If a player does under perform but listens and you help them improve then great. If they mess up on mechanics but take advice and don't mess up again, sweet. If the group stays tight and works as a team then awesome. The opposite of this of course is if they refuse to work as part of the team then they need to go. Their entitlement is not a reason to mess things up for the rest of the group.

I know of players in trials who don't have great parses but..... they are solid and consistent as a metronome, their time on target is really high and their group awareness is excellent, picking up almost before you realise someone has gone down., certainly valuable to the group.

I'd also value a player with a group buff set higher than just a parse amount, providing hircine, ebon or worm to the group? yes please.

MyKillv2.0 · February 2018

ZOS_CoriJ wrote: »

We've removed a handful of posts and are reopening this thread since there seems to be a lot of good debate on the subject. However we feel that this thread has also facilitated abrasive commentary. Please keep posts from getting personal to prove any points from either side of the topic. If this cannot be followed we will be closing the thread.

I may get "warned" for this but whatever....Could we possibly get a change in the ways the forums are set up as far as when announcing when Zo$ has commented on an issue/post?

When we as community members see the "Z" next to a thread title, it is suppose to signal that a member of the Zo$ Team has commented on the thread/issue. However 90% of the "comments" are from secondary mods and (the post, not the mods) serve no other purpose other than to announce they have "taken out the trash". Which are fine and gravy. Mods have a job to do and do it acceptable enough to continue to be employed. Again, whatever.

But can we PLEASE get a change in the process? Trash Collection post (post who seemingly add nothing to the conversations other than to announce that "I have taken out the trash") should not count as a 'Zo$ Response' to warrant the "Z" next to the thread. Now if you had added something constructive to the discussion such as you saying "The idea of DPS mark achievements is good/bad idea" or " We actually have been discussing this issue for some time now" or "the idea has been discussed and declined"... this would be commenting on the situation.

However as stated before, 90% of the posts that come from secondary mods are nothing more than "trash collecting" posts. They seldom add anything else to the conversation. Could we PLEASE remove the ability to have these post attract the "Z" next to a thread so that we as community members do not have to read through 9 out of 10 threads, only to realize that a mod has posted nothing constructive?

Make2k15 · February 2018

LordSemaj wrote: »

We all know how achievements are character bound instead of account wide and this creates some measure of annoyance for some. But what if we used that to our advantage? I propose ZOS implements new achievements based on your best DPS for either dummy parses or raid bosses. There could even be a dummy trial where the entire raid fights a wooden doll for the express purpose of measuring each person's damage under ideal circumstances. Stack all the raid buffs, spell power cure, and pots you want to try to exploit as high a total as you'd like. All it really means is that under ideal circumstances you actually CAN reach those totals. Players may even be encouraged to find group comps that stack all the right advantages for maximizing the output with a leaderboard tracking the highest parses.

The achievement reward? Titles of "The Destructive" for hitting 30k, "The Penetrator" for hitting 40k, "The Annihilator" for 50k dps, and so on. Or heck, a title that varies according to what your highest parse was: "of the 38k DPS". If you don't feel like bragging you can keep it yourself but it's a quicker means of showing people your damage potential than sharing parses. Now I know the DPS total doesn't necessarily reflect what you'll do in dungeons, especially if you respecced to something worse or aren't wearing the right gear or just are feeling lazy. But it would reflect what you have achieved and since many claim that skill is most of your damage anyway then this achievement demonstrates your potential level of mastery.

It's kind of a good idea. Maybe needs some refining though. I would like it to be less about bracking how much DPS you can do and more about to encourage beginning dds to learn how to achieve acceptable DPS level for desired group content.

(1) DPS test like that should be done in particular solo instance so that it would be the test of your individual skill level. (2) Make it part of the undaunted pledge system so that you need to unlock certain achievement to unlock certain level veteran dungeons(/pledges) for dd role: Maj al-Ragath (Dungeon Damage Dealer = DPS 10k), Turuk Redclaws (Veteran Dungeon Damage Dealer = DPS 15k), Urgalarg Chief-bane (Advanced Veteran Dungeon Damage Dealer = DPS 20k).

To address common tanking and healing practise problems in PUGs implement following kind of tanking and healing tests for unlocking veteran dungeon content for tank/healer role:

For the tank role Dungeon Damage Blocker will unlock Maj al-Ragath's veteran dungeons (/pledges), Veteran Dungeon Damage Blocker will unlock Turuk Redclaw's veteran dungeons (/pledges), Advanced Veteran Dungeon Damage Blocker will unlock Urgalarg Chief-bane's veteran dungeons (/pledges).

Dungeon Damage Blocker tanking test will require you to be able to taunt a boss character and survive the increasing damage certain amount of time so that no npc damage dealers will die while damaging the boss.

Veteran Dungeon Damage Blocker tanking test will require you to taunt spawning add waves and take them to certain aoe damage area near static boss character and keep them there (while holding boss aggro) to be killed by npc damage dealers. The add waves will spawn in increasing frequency and you need to be able to do certain amount of waves to get the achievement.

Advanced Veteran Dungeon Damage Blocker tanking test will require you to hold boss aggro at one spot in aoe damage area and pull randomly spawning (the add spawn frequency increases over time) adds to that aoe damage area from range for certain amount of time. In practise this test will require use of range taunt skill (inner fire).

For the healer role Dungeon Damage Healer will unlock Maj al-Ragath's veteran dungeons (/pledges), Veteran Dungeon Damage Healer will unlock Turuk Redclaws's veteran dungeons (/pledges), Advanced Veteran Dungeon Damage Healer will unlock Urgalarg Chief-bane's veteran dungeons (/pledges).

Dungeon Damage Healer healing test requires you to be able to heal tank character in a simple static boss fight for certain amount of time. The damage the tank receives will increase over time.

Veteran Dungeon Damage Healer healing test requires you to be able to heal tank npc and 2 damage dealer npcs near boss character in a simple static boss fight for certain amount of time. In practise this test will require you to use aoe healing skills (e.g. grand healing, cleansing ritual). The damage the tank and npcs receives will increase over time.

Advanced Veteran Dungeon Damage Healer healing test requires you to be able to heal tank npc and 2 separated moving damage dealer npcs in a simple boss fight for certain amount of time. In practise this test will require you to use aoe healing skills (e.g. grand healing, cleansing ritual) and burst healing skills (e.g. rushed ceremony, blessing of protection). The damage the tank and npcs receives will increase over time.

The bonus for this system would be that it would also eliminate the most brutal fake tanks/healers/dds who could not unlock that dungeon role for that character due to this system. For end game purposes add leader boards for the tests perhaps

Doctordarkspawn · February 2018

Yet more community segregation based on an ever shortening achieveable window of what groups will accept.

No. The tank changes will allready make this a problem next patch, we do not need more of it.

DjMuscleboy02 · February 2018

This was all a clever ruse to get "The penetrator" title into the game. I support.

Dubhliam · February 2018

I actually like the idea.
PC guilds often have DPS requirements for trial runs, and on PC it's rather easy to determine one's capabilities via TS or Discord uploads, but it's not that easy on PS4 or XBOX.

These achievements would greatly help all guilds on all platfotms, but consoles more.

Tied to Housing, those achievements should have restrictions:

Simply make the ach require a single 3mio+ dummy in the house and require the player to be the only visitor in the house.
Self buffed ach should be capped at 30k, since that is enough for any content, and is possible for ANY class.

starkerealm · February 2018

MyKillv2.0 wrote: »

ZOS_CoriJ wrote: »

We've removed a handful of posts and are reopening this thread since there seems to be a lot of good debate on the subject. However we feel that this thread has also facilitated abrasive commentary. Please keep posts from getting personal to prove any points from either side of the topic. If this cannot be followed we will be closing the thread.

I may get "warned" for this but whatever....Could we possibly get a change in the ways the forums are set up as far as when announcing when Zo$ has commented on an issue/post?

When we as community members see the "Z" next to a thread title, it is suppose to signal that a member of the Zo$ Team has commented on the thread/issue. However 90% of the "comments" are from secondary mods and (the post, not the mods) serve no other purpose other than to announce they have "taken out the trash". Which are fine and gravy. Mods have a job to do and do it acceptable enough to continue to be employed. Again, whatever.

But can we PLEASE get a change in the process? Trash Collection post (post who seemingly add nothing to the conversations other than to announce that "I have taken out the trash") should not count as a 'Zo$ Response' to warrant the "Z" next to the thread. Now if you had added something constructive to the discussion such as you saying "The idea of DPS mark achievements is good/bad idea" or " We actually have been discussing this issue for some time now" or "the idea has been discussed and declined"... this would be commenting on the situation.

However as stated before, 90% of the posts that come from secondary mods are nothing more than "trash collecting" posts. They seldom add anything else to the conversation. Could we PLEASE remove the ability to have these post attract the "Z" next to a thread so that we as community members do not have to read through 9 out of 10 threads, only to realize that a mod has posted nothing constructive?

Gina talked about changing this years ago. If I remember correctly, it's a limitation in the way the forum software is configured that would have required more effort than it was worth to adjust.

Dubhliam · February 2018

Colecovision wrote: »

Why not insist everyone show up with the maelstrom conquerer title? It's already in the game. Seems like 4 - 12 vMA champs should be able to get HM done if they work together. Or is that still not enough of a litmus test?

Actually, it is not.

I had the same idea, and I enforced it in my guild thinking vMA is a better player filter than some arbitrary number since players would have to know and master the mechanics of vMA rather than just mash some buttons in front of a dummy.

Boy was I wrong.

Anyone can finish vMA if they set their mind to it.
And I literally mean ANYONE.
A player can spend months inside vMA until he finally gets lucky and finishes.
Or simply rolls out a magsorc. Easymode.

Quality players finish vMA in 30 mins no sweat. That cannot be compared to a single clear after tons of hours of trying.

I did the same thing with vDSA.
I thought it was a nice achievement for skilled players.
But any group can finish it given tons of time and tons of Soul Gems.

Since then the only achs I consider have a no death component.

Flawless conqueror and dungeon Challengers.

LordSemaj · February 2018

Make2k15 wrote: »

LordSemaj wrote: »

We all know how achievements are character bound instead of account wide and this creates some measure of annoyance for some. But what if we used that to our advantage? I propose ZOS implements new achievements based on your best DPS for either dummy parses or raid bosses. There could even be a dummy trial where the entire raid fights a wooden doll for the express purpose of measuring each person's damage under ideal circumstances. Stack all the raid buffs, spell power cure, and pots you want to try to exploit as high a total as you'd like. All it really means is that under ideal circumstances you actually CAN reach those totals. Players may even be encouraged to find group comps that stack all the right advantages for maximizing the output with a leaderboard tracking the highest parses.

The achievement reward? Titles of "The Destructive" for hitting 30k, "The Penetrator" for hitting 40k, "The Annihilator" for 50k dps, and so on. Or heck, a title that varies according to what your highest parse was: "of the 38k DPS". If you don't feel like bragging you can keep it yourself but it's a quicker means of showing people your damage potential than sharing parses. Now I know the DPS total doesn't necessarily reflect what you'll do in dungeons, especially if you respecced to something worse or aren't wearing the right gear or just are feeling lazy. But it would reflect what you have achieved and since many claim that skill is most of your damage anyway then this achievement demonstrates your potential level of mastery.

It's kind of a good idea. Maybe needs some refining though. I would like it to be less about bracking how much DPS you can do and more about to encourage beginning dds to learn how to achieve acceptable DPS level for desired group content.

(1) DPS test like that should be done in particular solo instance so that it would be the test of your individual skill level. (2) Make it part of the undaunted pledge system so that you need to unlock certain achievement to unlock certain level veteran dungeons(/pledges) for dd role: Maj al-Ragath (Dungeon Damage Dealer = DPS 10k), Turuk Redclaws (Veteran Dungeon Damage Dealer = DPS 15k), Urgalarg Chief-bane (Advanced Veteran Dungeon Damage Dealer = DPS 20k).

To address common tanking and healing practise problems in PUGs implement following kind of tanking and healing tests for unlocking veteran dungeon content for tank/healer role:

For the tank role Dungeon Damage Blocker will unlock Maj al-Ragath's veteran dungeons (/pledges), Veteran Dungeon Damage Blocker will unlock Turuk Redclaw's veteran dungeons (/pledges), Advanced Veteran Dungeon Damage Blocker will unlock Urgalarg Chief-bane's veteran dungeons (/pledges).

Dungeon Damage Blocker tanking test will require you to be able to taunt a boss character and survive the increasing damage certain amount of time so that no npc damage dealers will die while damaging the boss.

Veteran Dungeon Damage Blocker tanking test will require you to taunt spawning add waves and take them to certain aoe damage area near static boss character and keep them there (while holding boss aggro) to be killed by npc damage dealers. The add waves will spawn in increasing frequency and you need to be able to do certain amount of waves to get the achievement.

Advanced Veteran Dungeon Damage Blocker tanking test will require you to hold boss aggro at one spot in aoe damage area and pull randomly spawning (the add spawn frequency increases over time) adds to that aoe damage area from range for certain amount of time. In practise this test will require use of range taunt skill (inner fire).

For the healer role Dungeon Damage Healer will unlock Maj al-Ragath's veteran dungeons (/pledges), Veteran Dungeon Damage Healer will unlock Turuk Redclaws's veteran dungeons (/pledges), Advanced Veteran Dungeon Damage Healer will unlock Urgalarg Chief-bane's veteran dungeons (/pledges).

Dungeon Damage Healer healing test requires you to be able to heal tank character in a simple static boss fight for certain amount of time. The damage the tank receives will increase over time.

Veteran Dungeon Damage Healer healing test requires you to be able to heal tank npc and 2 damage dealer npcs near boss character in a simple static boss fight for certain amount of time. In practise this test will require you to use aoe healing skills (e.g. grand healing, cleansing ritual). The damage the tank and npcs receives will increase over time.

Advanced Veteran Dungeon Damage Healer healing test requires you to be able to heal tank npc and 2 separated moving damage dealer npcs in a simple boss fight for certain amount of time. In practise this test will require you to use aoe healing skills (e.g. grand healing, cleansing ritual) and burst healing skills (e.g. rushed ceremony, blessing of protection). The damage the tank and npcs receives will increase over time.

The bonus for this system would be that it would also eliminate the most brutal fake tanks/healers/dds who could not unlock that dungeon role for that character due to this system. For end game purposes add leader boards for the tests perhaps

I think that would be a fine alternative. Secret World actually had something similar, a mandatory trial for DPS, healer, or tank before you were even allowed to queue for end game dungeon content. There's no need to place those sorts of limits but having the trial would be warranted to demonstrate a basic knowledge of how to perform the roles to their expected limits.

LordSemaj · February 2018

randomkeyhits wrote: »

If the achievement is older than say six weeks then it has a very limited value as a player measure method.

As has been pointed out multiple times now, it's not a measure of player worth. It can never be a measure of player worth. Players may still die, may still underperform, may still be incapable of performing the mechanics, or may be the most toxic group members you've ever had to displeasure of encountering. It's a measure of DPS and nothing more. Far too many in this topic find their DPS to be personal as though it speaks of the quality of a player they happen to be if they cannot reach some arbitrary figure. When in actuality, all it represents is a test of the level of DPS your character has been able to put out under ideal circumstances, which can be used whenever DPS requirements are pertinent to say nothing of the measuring the player.

Though you've also provided the first piece of criticism in this entire thread that I actually find to be valid. Nerfs happen and modify overpowered sets to no longer be able to perform such things. It partly doesn't matter because if they were able to achieve it at all then they at least had a solid rotation going to accumulate the needed damage per second. But I can see a few instances in ESO history where it would have complicated things. Most recently would be the sustain nerf, it would have been much much easier before Morrowind to parse high figures. Food for thought.

DjMuscleboy02 wrote: »

This was all a clever ruse to get "The penetrator" title into the game. I support.

starkerealm · February 2018

LordSemaj wrote: »

I think that would be a fine alternative. Secret World actually had something similar, a mandatory trial for DPS, healer, or tank before you were even allowed to queue for end game dungeon content. There's no need to place those sorts of limits but having the trial would be warranted to demonstrate a basic knowledge of how to perform the roles to their expected limits.

The funny thing was, The Gatekeeper didn't, really, work. All that glowing, gold **** proved was if you could find a guide online to clearing it. You'd see groups demanding that you could display the appropriate badge, but he was never a particularly good metric for someone's ability to clear nightmare content.

I can give them credit, the heal test is probably the most accurate depiction of DPSs I've seen from NPCs, where they'd stand in stupid and blame you when they died.

Now, having said that, The Gatekeeper could have been a pretty good tutorial system. With a little more info in game, as opposed to on the forums, he could have functioned as a fantastic system for teaching you how to handle dungeon mechanics. Unfortunately, there were only the three tests, and none of it related to the reality of nightmare dungeons or their mechanics.

LordSemaj · February 2018

starkerealm wrote: »

The funny thing was, The Gatekeeper didn't, really, work. All that glowing, gold **** proved was if you could find a guide online to clearing it. You'd see groups demanding that you could display the appropriate badge, but he was never a particularly good metric for someone's ability to clear nightmare content.

It doesn't matter if someone looks up a guide. That means they went through the effort of researching how to clear content, something they'll need to do in the future content. It means they were capable of following simple instructions, something they'll need to do in the future content. It means they were able to perform the role expected of them in a team setting, something they'll need to do in the future content.

starkerealm wrote: »

Unfortunately, there were only the three tests, and none of it related to the reality of nightmare dungeons or their mechanics.

This is not the fault of the test. This is your fault for expecting the test to measure something it cannot. They demonstrated the basics of team play and the expectations one might find common to all dungeons. In that role they proved apt at keeping inexperienced players out until they proved an understanding of how to function in a group. This was necessary because of the amount of soloing that players would do before reaching end game and having no experience grouping whatsoever.

Kuramas9tails · February 2018

I have never been impressed with DPS tests on a dummy. Someone beating VMaelstrom with a certain score is more impressive because it tests everything a DPS needs to have: damage, situation awareness, good reaction time, patience, and self-sustain. A DPS test dummy is only testing raw damage but that DPS that dies a handful of times is already providing less DPS than someone who has slightly lower DPS but hasn't died. People get better with experience....usually....

starkerealm · February 2018

Dubhliam wrote: »

Since then the only achs I consider have a no death component.

Even that's not 100% reliable. Night before last I ran vBC2. I got distracted about halfway through, and auto ran into a mob, looked back at my screen, dead. Well, derp. The other DPS had a couple unfortunate encounters with Rillis, and there was something weird going on with my resources the whole run (just couldn't maintain stamina, which was murdering my DPS). Come out the other side, finish it, the no death achievement dings.

Huh?

Come to think of it, we may have had some deaths during vDC2, and got the no deaths achievement there as well. (Though, it's distinctly possible that no one actually died.

starkerealm · February 2018

LordSemaj wrote: »

starkerealm wrote: »

The funny thing was, The Gatekeeper didn't, really, work. All that glowing, gold **** proved was if you could find a guide online to clearing it. You'd see groups demanding that you could display the appropriate badge, but he was never a particularly good metric for someone's ability to clear nightmare content.

It doesn't matter if someone looks up a guide. That means they went through the effort of researching how to clear content, something they'll need to do in the future content. It means they were capable of following simple instructions, something they'll need to do in the future content. It means they were able to perform the role expected of them in a team setting, something they'll need to do in the future content.

starkerealm wrote: »

Unfortunately, there were only the three tests, and none of it related to the reality of nightmare dungeons or their mechanics.

This is not the fault of the test. This is your fault for expecting the test to measure something it cannot. They demonstrated the basics of team play and the expectations one might find common to all dungeons. In that role they proved apt at keeping inexperienced players out until they proved an understanding of how to function in a group. This was necessary because of the amount of soloing that players would do before reaching end game and having no experience grouping whatsoever.

It was more of a problem with how TSW approached difficulty. The game was designed more around tailoring your build to the specific situation in front of you (basically) on the fly. The Gatekeeper didn't really test that at all. It just gave you a fairly simple challenge to cope with. If you'd actually been playing the game, you would have seen far more complex obstacles long before getting to that point.

Honestly, thinking back, the utter BS of TSW's Scenarios may be where my aversion to vMA comes from.

Kingslayer513 · February 2018

MyKillv2.0 wrote: »

ZOS_CoriJ wrote: »

We've removed a handful of posts and are reopening this thread since there seems to be a lot of good debate on the subject. However we feel that this thread has also facilitated abrasive commentary. Please keep posts from getting personal to prove any points from either side of the topic. If this cannot be followed we will be closing the thread.

I may get "warned" for this but whatever....Could we possibly get a change in the ways the forums are set up as far as when announcing when Zo$ has commented on an issue/post?

When we as community members see the "Z" next to a thread title, it is suppose to signal that a member of the Zo$ Team has commented on the thread/issue. However 90% of the "comments" are from secondary mods and (the post, not the mods) serve no other purpose other than to announce they have "taken out the trash". Which are fine and gravy. Mods have a job to do and do it acceptable enough to continue to be employed. Again, whatever.

But can we PLEASE get a change in the process? Trash Collection post (post who seemingly add nothing to the conversations other than to announce that "I have taken out the trash") should not count as a 'Zo$ Response' to warrant the "Z" next to the thread. Now if you had added something constructive to the discussion such as you saying "The idea of DPS mark achievements is good/bad idea" or " We actually have been discussing this issue for some time now" or "the idea has been discussed and declined"... this would be commenting on the situation.

However as stated before, 90% of the posts that come from secondary mods are nothing more than "trash collecting" posts. They seldom add anything else to the conversation. Could we PLEASE remove the ability to have these post attract the "Z" next to a thread so that we as community members do not have to read through 9 out of 10 threads, only to realize that a mod has posted nothing constructive?

Agreed. I read this thread before and dismissed it because IMO it's highly unlikely that the devs will bother working out the kinks to get this implemented. Now I saw the Z and thought the devs had actually weighed in on the issue. Nope, I should have known better. RIP.