There are no fake dps. Even bad dps is still dps. There are people who are poorly outfitted, or unfamiliar with mechanics, or unskilled at their build and/or rotation. But they’re still doing dps.

Sometimes those people are open to learning and growing. Sometimes they are not willing to change and will continue doing lousy dps in every group they’re a part of.

But bad dps isn’t fake dps. It’s just bad.

ForzaRammer wrote: »

Reverb wrote: »

There are no fake dps. Even bad dps is still dps. There are people who are poorly outfitted, or unfamiliar with mechanics, or unskilled at their build and/or rotation. But they’re still doing dps.

Sometimes those people are open to learning and growing. Sometimes they are not willing to change and will continue doing lousy dps in every group they’re a part of.

But bad dps isn’t fake dps. It’s just bad.

How you define real tank and healer then?

A tank with no taunt and no group utility is a fake tank. They are failing to perform the core function of their role. A tank who doesn’t cc mobs, sometimes loses aggro, and doesn’t debuff is a bad tank but still a tank.

A player who doesn’t have HoT and burst group heals is a fake healer. They are failing to perform the core function of their role. A healer who has group healing but doesn’t keep buffs up, doesn’t assist with group resource management, and doesn’t anticipate when burst heals will be needed is a bad healer. But still a healer.

ForzaRammer wrote: »

Reverb wrote: »

ForzaRammer wrote: »

Reverb wrote: »

There are no fake dps. Even bad dps is still dps. There are people who are poorly outfitted, or unfamiliar with mechanics, or unskilled at their build and/or rotation. But they’re still doing dps.

Sometimes those people are open to learning and growing. Sometimes they are not willing to change and will continue doing lousy dps in every group they’re a part of.

But bad dps isn’t fake dps. It’s just bad.

How you define real tank and healer then?

A tank with no taunt and no group utility is a fake tank. They are failing to perform the core function of their role. A tank who doesn’t cc mobs, sometimes loses aggro, and doesn’t debuff is a bad tank but still a tank.

A player who doesn’t have HoT and burst group heals is a fake healer. They are failing to perform the core function of their role. A healer who has group healing but doesn’t keep buffs up, doesn’t assist with group resource management, and doesn’t anticipate when burst heals will be needed is a bad healer. But still a healer.

Given the fact all taunt does damage in this game. Anyone who satisfy your definition of real tank, also satisfy your definition of real dd.

You can read the other comments i left. Basically the discussion is about the fairness of this (supported by you and some others) distribution of responsibilities,

A tank can do damage but is not required to do damage. A DD is required to do damage, but there isn't really a required amount (other than "more than 0", where 0 is basically just AFK, and not a fake DD).

Fundamentally, a "fake" is trying to cheat the queue by claiming to be something they aren't, and queueing as DD is never cheating the queue because it's the slowest option. The price of a faster queue should be that you have to actually try to fill a support role, while the slowest queue has no equivalent price.

Blood_again wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

All of these do non-zero damage. So, they would be real DPS by such a definition. There is basically no such thing as someone who isn't a DPS. They have no responsibility to the group.

I would dispute it.
Responsibility is about doing something for it, not just doing it randomly.

Anything that meets the definition of a thing, is that thing. That's why dictionary makers try to tailor definitions to be broad enough to encompass all examples of a thing, but also narrow enough to exclude things that don't count.

The problem with the "any non-zero amount" of damage definition is that includes a number of things that shouldn't fit.

There is a problem with dps requirements. If we add any amount of dps to the "real DPS" definition, we momentarily put any learning player to the fake category, which is totally wrong.

Not really. The DPS checks in normal are in the basement. A vet dungeon isn't for new players, it's for vets. And I don't think it's a problem with asking people to think about their build and if they are able to complete vet content before queuing vet. Many of the ones doing so, queue knowing their character isn't ready for vet, but wanting a carry anyway.

Beyond that, plenty of people get labeled as fake tanks because they don't slot a taunt. But I've met plenty of fake tanks that thought they could damage things and maintain aggro. Such a player are also learning, but being called fakes anyway.

ForzaRammer wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

flizomica wrote: »

Fake DPS = not actually trying to do DPS, the same way that a fake tank or healer isn't actually trying to fulfil those roles.

That looks like someone whose bars are mostly filled with non damaging skills, or if they're not really using skills (e.g. light attack spamming bow people). Mathematically I would (mentally) accuse someone of being a fake DPS if they do the same damage as my dedicated tanks (~3-8k single-target) - in other words, the same DPS as a character that isn't actually trying to DPS at all.

The issue with this "definition" is that if the damage dealer is doing some damage they are dealing damage. The fake tank is not taunting and the fake healer is not providing any heals to the group. It is a firm line.

In other words, a fake DPS would have to try really hard to be truly fake.

Granted, I agree that there is a real problem with damage dealers in the GF, so I avoid the GF and only run with guildies. Since many of those same low DPS players also die to well-telegraphed damage and miss mechanics in general it seems many are extremely inexperienced in general or more so with fights their mechanics are meaningful.

How to fix it. I have no idea which is why I no longer use the GF to find a group. I have never played a MMORPG where the performance of many of the players that queue for to get into a group was so poor outside of raid GFs.

The debate is about establishing a fair definition and classification (for real dd tank and healer).

People on affirmative side do not agree that 1 dps make a person real dd.

I doubt there is anyone who is only doing one dps in dungeons. They would have to just stand there doing nothing most of the time in which case they are probably a troll. Trolls in the GF are not what this thread is about.

In other words, thx for verifying the accuracy of my comment that a low dps damage dealer is still a damage dealer.

I think one of the problems is the disparity between what is expected in order to draw the bad/fake distinction for each role.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Blood_again wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

All of these do non-zero damage. So, they would be real DPS by such a definition. There is basically no such thing as someone who isn't a DPS. They have no responsibility to the group.

I would dispute it.
Responsibility is about doing something for it, not just doing it randomly.

Anything that meets the definition of a thing, is that thing. That's why dictionary makers try to tailor definitions to be broad enough to encompass all examples of a thing, but also narrow enough to exclude things that don't count.

The problem with the "any non-zero amount" of damage definition is that includes a number of things that shouldn't fit.

There is a problem with dps requirements. If we add any amount of dps to the "real DPS" definition, we momentarily put any learning player to the fake category, which is totally wrong.

Not really. The DPS checks in normal are in the basement. A vet dungeon isn't for new players, it's for vets. And I don't think it's a problem with asking people to think about their build and if they are able to complete vet content before queuing vet. Many of the ones doing so, queue knowing their character isn't ready for vet, but wanting a carry anyway.

Beyond that, plenty of people get labeled as fake tanks because they don't slot a taunt. But I've met plenty of fake tanks that thought they could damage things and maintain aggro. Such a player are also learning, but being called fakes anyway.

This is one of the points I tried to make in my post at the bottom of page 2. I see many people who draw the line between fake and bad dd as dealing any damage (at least one), but they simultaneously require a tank to use a taunt in order to avoid being labeled fake. These two things are not equivalent. If you want to endorse the former definition of a fake dd, you should also be more lenient in your definition of a fake tank. A tank that holds any amount of aggro, even by just running into battle first and attacking, regardless of whether or not they taunt, shouldn't be assumed to be fake but rather just bad. If you can't accept this delineation for tanks and continue to expect more (a taunt) to avoid labeling them as fake, then you should expect more from a dd as well in order to avoid labeling them as fake.

Amottica wrote: »

ForzaRammer wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

flizomica wrote: »

Fake DPS = not actually trying to do DPS, the same way that a fake tank or healer isn't actually trying to fulfil those roles.

That looks like someone whose bars are mostly filled with non damaging skills, or if they're not really using skills (e.g. light attack spamming bow people). Mathematically I would (mentally) accuse someone of being a fake DPS if they do the same damage as my dedicated tanks (~3-8k single-target) - in other words, the same DPS as a character that isn't actually trying to DPS at all.

The issue with this "definition" is that if the damage dealer is doing some damage they are dealing damage. The fake tank is not taunting and the fake healer is not providing any heals to the group. It is a firm line.

In other words, a fake DPS would have to try really hard to be truly fake.

Granted, I agree that there is a real problem with damage dealers in the GF, so I avoid the GF and only run with guildies. Since many of those same low DPS players also die to well-telegraphed damage and miss mechanics in general it seems many are extremely inexperienced in general or more so with fights their mechanics are meaningful.

How to fix it. I have no idea which is why I no longer use the GF to find a group. I have never played a MMORPG where the performance of many of the players that queue for to get into a group was so poor outside of raid GFs.

The debate is about establishing a fair definition and classification (for real dd tank and healer).

People on affirmative side do not agree that 1 dps make a person real dd.

I doubt there is anyone who is only doing one dps in dungeons. They would have to just stand there doing nothing most of the time in which case they are probably a troll. Trolls in the GF are not what this thread is about.

In other words, thx for verifying the accuracy of my comment that a low dps damage dealer is still a damage dealer.

Have you read the comments from others on the negative side? Clearly “1 dps make it real” is what they are pushing

ForzaRammer wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

ForzaRammer wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

flizomica wrote: »

Fake DPS = not actually trying to do DPS, the same way that a fake tank or healer isn't actually trying to fulfil those roles.

That looks like someone whose bars are mostly filled with non damaging skills, or if they're not really using skills (e.g. light attack spamming bow people). Mathematically I would (mentally) accuse someone of being a fake DPS if they do the same damage as my dedicated tanks (~3-8k single-target) - in other words, the same DPS as a character that isn't actually trying to DPS at all.

The issue with this "definition" is that if the damage dealer is doing some damage they are dealing damage. The fake tank is not taunting and the fake healer is not providing any heals to the group. It is a firm line.

In other words, a fake DPS would have to try really hard to be truly fake.

Granted, I agree that there is a real problem with damage dealers in the GF, so I avoid the GF and only run with guildies. Since many of those same low DPS players also die to well-telegraphed damage and miss mechanics in general it seems many are extremely inexperienced in general or more so with fights their mechanics are meaningful.

How to fix it. I have no idea which is why I no longer use the GF to find a group. I have never played a MMORPG where the performance of many of the players that queue for to get into a group was so poor outside of raid GFs.

The debate is about establishing a fair definition and classification (for real dd tank and healer).

People on affirmative side do not agree that 1 dps make a person real dd.

I doubt there is anyone who is only doing one dps in dungeons. They would have to just stand there doing nothing most of the time in which case they are probably a troll. Trolls in the GF are not what this thread is about.

In other words, thx for verifying the accuracy of my comment that a low dps damage dealer is still a damage dealer.

Have you read the comments from others on the negative side? Clearly “1 dps make it real” is what they are pushing

I see no need to read every single comment made. However, if they do 1 DPS they are still dealing damage which makes them a damage dealer by definition. In reality, someone doing that little damage is a troll as it takes a lot of work to keep damage that low.

Most of the comments trying to define fake DPS are nothing more than describing what someone thinks is pitiful DPS but it is far from fake. They are just not very good, far from it. People who want to avoid such poor performers need to pre-form their group. The experiences I have had running with my guild are far superior to the best experience I had when I used to use the GF to get groups.

ForzaRammer wrote: »

Do we need to have a discussion about prerequisites of prerequisites is still prerequisites?

Let me use your analogy here, “johnny (dd) is getting paid for just moving his legs, we make the same money, why you require me (tank) to unload the truck on top of moving my legs?”

This is exactly what workplace discrimination looks like.

I can’t change the game design, it is way easier to make it fair by “requiring johnny to move his legs at least 3 times as much as i do”

I'll expand my analogy. If johny joined a team as a beer-bringer, he's responsibility is moving his legs. It is OK that he does just this.
If he moves his legs as fast as high-loaded you, he's a bad bringer. If he went in the opposite side because he didn't know where the beer is, if he fell and lost the beer, he's extremely bad. I would vote kick him from party for doing his job bad.
Still he's doing his job if he went for beer. He's not fake.
Setting the chair and smoking in the middle of encounter instead of going for beer makes him fake. Not his speed.

I see we are talking about the reward now. It is totally different topic and I agree that it is unfair in ESO. That is where the discrimination hides, not in roles.
Low dps and high dps DDs get the same reward in the end. Tank who kept 10 daedroths gets the same reward as 5k dps dd who hardly ever scratched the boss. Fake healer who slotted no heals and casted no heals gets the same reward that the tank who did all the hard job while self-healing. Soloing a dungeon brings the same reward as making it in 4-people group. It is frustrating and it is unfair.
I would like to see bonus rewards for doing more damage, for healing more health points, for mitigating more incoming damage, even for ressing group mates. Any kind of bonuses that reward additional work and push people to do their work better. That would make the game fair, not declaring bad dd as fake, not loading the simple roles with numbers and relations.

As for changing the game design, I would discuss if it is real to affect the design solutions as a user. But it is a sensitive question for many, so I won't.

BTW would you like to post your triad of role definitions, so we can compare and choose more fair, more simple, more obvious among them? It will stimulate the debates, I guess.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Blood_again wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

All of these do non-zero damage. So, they would be real DPS by such a definition. There is basically no such thing as someone who isn't a DPS. They have no responsibility to the group.

I would dispute it.
Responsibility is about doing something for it, not just doing it randomly.

Anything that meets the definition of a thing, is that thing. That's why dictionary makers try to tailor definitions to be broad enough to encompass all examples of a thing, but also narrow enough to exclude things that don't count.

The problem with the "any non-zero amount" of damage definition is that includes a number of things that shouldn't fit.

There is a problem with dps requirements. If we add any amount of dps to the "real DPS" definition, we momentarily put any learning player to the fake category, which is totally wrong.

Not really. The DPS checks in normal are in the basement. A vet dungeon isn't for new players, it's for vets. And I don't think it's a problem with asking people to think about their build and if they are able to complete vet content before queuing vet. Many of the ones doing so, queue knowing their character isn't ready for vet, but wanting a carry anyway.

Beyond that, plenty of people get labeled as fake tanks because they don't slot a taunt. But I've met plenty of fake tanks that thought they could damage things and maintain aggro. Such a player are also learning, but being called fakes anyway.

If we talk about tanks who didn't slot taunt by mistake or by having little experience, I'm convinsed that they shouldn't be called as fakes. They are just bad when try to fulfill their role with wrong tools. I believe that they will learn, progress and do things better. I put some examples here at the end how people solved it on place.
The same I think about dds who try.

The opposite is about dds, who definitely knew their damage is inadequate to the encounter but joined it. That is fake dd, if you ask me.
Intension and reaction are the keys.


As for dps-checks.
While reading about them I found that people try to add it do the real dd definitions. I found it strange and that's why.
Any dps check means that group with definite dps will successfully pass the encounter. It sets a success as the only possible result of encounter with real players, totally ignoring the fact that run can be unsuccesfull although people do their work.

I see there are two strange PUG mind-sets that are grown by ESO powercreep and mixing newcomers with veterans.
1. Success or fake. Run should always be succesfull. It is so usual to get a group with overpowered players that PUG run can't be failed. If something goes wrong, that's because somebody doesn't do his job at all, fake, we need to blame and kick somebody.
2. Faking is OK. Again, it is so usual to get a group with overpowered players that a weak player can do absolutely nothing and group will succed the encounter. That brought us to selling runs, stealing achivements, fakes of all roles including dd. As a result, many fakes take as usual when other people work instead of them.

I would just remind, that the fact of failed run with weak group doesn't make people in this group fakes yet. People can do their fair work, but still fail due to mistakes, lack of knowledge, lack of experiense in moving, damaging and mechanics.
It is a fair learning curve for any role, including dd. Unfortunately this curve is often broken by encounter with veterans, who makes things visibly easy and tell them "you just need more dps to skip this mechanic, dude".
Again, failing dps check while doing their fair work doesn't make the dd fake. Failing boss fight by tank who got oneshot doesn't either. They learn, they make mistakes, they hopefully get better.
That's why I think that dps checks have no place in basic definition of the dd role. That's why dps numbers can't determine fake/non-fake border. Bad/medium/good - yes, probably, but not fake.

Blood_again wrote: »

ForzaRammer wrote: »

Do we need to have a discussion about prerequisites of prerequisites is still prerequisites?

Let me use your analogy here, “johnny (dd) is getting paid for just moving his legs, we make the same money, why you require me (tank) to unload the truck on top of moving my legs?”

This is exactly what workplace discrimination looks like.

I can’t change the game design, it is way easier to make it fair by “requiring johnny to move his legs at least 3 times as much as i do”

I'll expand my analogy. If johny joined a team as a beer-bringer, he's responsibility is moving his legs. It is OK that he does just this.
If he moves his legs as fast as high-loaded you, he's a bad bringer. If he went in the opposite side because he didn't know where the beer is, if he fell and lost the beer, he's extremely bad. I would vote kick him from party for doing his job bad.
Still he's doing his job if he went for beer. He's not fake.
Setting the chair and smoking in the middle of encounter instead of going for beer makes him fake. Not his speed.

I see we are talking about the reward now. It is totally different topic and I agree that it is unfair in ESO. That is where the discrimination hides, not in roles.
Low dps and high dps DDs get the same reward in the end. Tank who kept 10 daedroths gets the same reward as 5k dps dd who hardly ever scratched the boss. Fake healer who slotted no heals and casted no heals gets the same reward that the tank who did all the hard job while self-healing. Soloing a dungeon brings the same reward as making it in 4-people group. It is frustrating and it is unfair.
I would like to see bonus rewards for doing more damage, for healing more health points, for mitigating more incoming damage, even for ressing group mates. Any kind of bonuses that reward additional work and push people to do their work better. That would make the game fair, not declaring bad dd as fake, not loading the simple roles with numbers and relations.

As for changing the game design, I would discuss if it is real to affect the design solutions as a user. But it is a sensitive question for many, so I won't.

BTW would you like to post your triad of role definitions, so we can compare and choose more fair, more simple, more obvious among them? It will stimulate the debates, I guess.

Your analogy:
Job responsibilities for position 1(me): move my legs and carry stuff
Job responsibilities for position 2(johnny): just move his legs
And now both position make same wage.

At least you support performance bonus. The thing is my base wage should already be higher than johnny’s, because of your job descriptions. Even if we both do the bare minimum, my work is still more thus I should make more.

Do you support a system where tank always get more base reward than dd?

And here are my definitions of the roles:
Tank: taunt, debuff and survive better than the best companion can do
Healer: heal and buff more than the best companion can do
Dd: do more damage than the best companion can do

I don’t believe the sets are disjoint, and I believe union of 3 is not the whole player base. I try to achieve equality across positions in my job descriptions, and same base wage for all is just simpler.

ForzaRammer wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

ForzaRammer wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

ForzaRammer wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

flizomica wrote: »

Fake DPS = not actually trying to do DPS, the same way that a fake tank or healer isn't actually trying to fulfil those roles.

That looks like someone whose bars are mostly filled with non damaging skills, or if they're not really using skills (e.g. light attack spamming bow people). Mathematically I would (mentally) accuse someone of being a fake DPS if they do the same damage as my dedicated tanks (~3-8k single-target) - in other words, the same DPS as a character that isn't actually trying to DPS at all.

The issue with this "definition" is that if the damage dealer is doing some damage they are dealing damage. The fake tank is not taunting and the fake healer is not providing any heals to the group. It is a firm line.

In other words, a fake DPS would have to try really hard to be truly fake.

Granted, I agree that there is a real problem with damage dealers in the GF, so I avoid the GF and only run with guildies. Since many of those same low DPS players also die to well-telegraphed damage and miss mechanics in general it seems many are extremely inexperienced in general or more so with fights their mechanics are meaningful.

How to fix it. I have no idea which is why I no longer use the GF to find a group. I have never played a MMORPG where the performance of many of the players that queue for to get into a group was so poor outside of raid GFs.

The debate is about establishing a fair definition and classification (for real dd tank and healer).

People on affirmative side do not agree that 1 dps make a person real dd.

I doubt there is anyone who is only doing one dps in dungeons. They would have to just stand there doing nothing most of the time in which case they are probably a troll. Trolls in the GF are not what this thread is about.

In other words, thx for verifying the accuracy of my comment that a low dps damage dealer is still a damage dealer.

Have you read the comments from others on the negative side? Clearly “1 dps make it real” is what they are pushing

I see no need to read every single comment made. However, if they do 1 DPS they are still dealing damage which makes them a damage dealer by definition. In reality, someone doing that little damage is a troll as it takes a lot of work to keep damage that low.

Most of the comments trying to define fake DPS are nothing more than describing what someone thinks is pitiful DPS but it is far from fake. They are just not very good, far from it. People who want to avoid such poor performers need to pre-form their group. The experiences I have had running with my guild are far superior to the best experience I had when I used to use the GF to get groups.

“Doing 1 dps make them real dd” is your definition of roles, this is not accepted by us on the affirmative side. This is the exact topic we are debating.

And our main counter to your definition is: such definition is fundamentally discriminatory against tanks, it is requiring tank to do what dd does, and more.

And we desire equality.

I see no reason to discuss a theoretical that will never happen unless the player is a troll and such a discussion will solve nothing.

the1andonlyskwex wrote: »

ForzaRammer wrote: »

Blood_again wrote: »

ForzaRammer wrote: »

Do we need to have a discussion about prerequisites of prerequisites is still prerequisites?

Let me use your analogy here, “johnny (dd) is getting paid for just moving his legs, we make the same money, why you require me (tank) to unload the truck on top of moving my legs?”

This is exactly what workplace discrimination looks like.

I can’t change the game design, it is way easier to make it fair by “requiring johnny to move his legs at least 3 times as much as i do”

I'll expand my analogy. If johny joined a team as a beer-bringer, he's responsibility is moving his legs. It is OK that he does just this.
If he moves his legs as fast as high-loaded you, he's a bad bringer. If he went in the opposite side because he didn't know where the beer is, if he fell and lost the beer, he's extremely bad. I would vote kick him from party for doing his job bad.
Still he's doing his job if he went for beer. He's not fake.
Setting the chair and smoking in the middle of encounter instead of going for beer makes him fake. Not his speed.

I see we are talking about the reward now. It is totally different topic and I agree that it is unfair in ESO. That is where the discrimination hides, not in roles.
Low dps and high dps DDs get the same reward in the end. Tank who kept 10 daedroths gets the same reward as 5k dps dd who hardly ever scratched the boss. Fake healer who slotted no heals and casted no heals gets the same reward that the tank who did all the hard job while self-healing. Soloing a dungeon brings the same reward as making it in 4-people group. It is frustrating and it is unfair.
I would like to see bonus rewards for doing more damage, for healing more health points, for mitigating more incoming damage, even for ressing group mates. Any kind of bonuses that reward additional work and push people to do their work better. That would make the game fair, not declaring bad dd as fake, not loading the simple roles with numbers and relations.

As for changing the game design, I would discuss if it is real to affect the design solutions as a user. But it is a sensitive question for many, so I won't.

BTW would you like to post your triad of role definitions, so we can compare and choose more fair, more simple, more obvious among them? It will stimulate the debates, I guess.

Your analogy:
Job responsibilities for position 1(me): move my legs and carry stuff
Job responsibilities for position 2(johnny): just move his legs
And now both position make same wage.

At least you support performance bonus. The thing is my base wage should already be higher than johnny’s, because of your job descriptions. Even if we both do the bare minimum, my work is still more thus I should make more.

Do you support a system where tank always get more base reward than dd?

And here are my definitions of the roles:
Tank: taunt, debuff and survive better than the best companion can do
Healer: heal and buff more than the best companion can do
Dd: do more damage than the best companion can do

I don’t believe the sets are disjoint, and I believe union of 3 is not the whole player base. I try to achieve equality across positions in my job descriptions, and same base wage for all is just simpler.

But tanks do get substantially more rewards. Factoring in queue times, someone who queues as a tank can easily complete twice as many dungeons per hour compared to someone who queues as a DD. This disparity is why there are higher expectations of tanks. By queueing as a tank you're agreeing to take on a more demanding role in exchange for a faster queue.

Queueing time is basically the hiring process, faster hiring process is not compensation for doing more work on the job.

And “you got hired within 2 days of interview” is not justification for “you get extra duty while not getting paid a cent more”, at least not IRL.

ForzaRammer wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

ForzaRammer wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

ForzaRammer wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

ForzaRammer wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

flizomica wrote: »

Fake DPS = not actually trying to do DPS, the same way that a fake tank or healer isn't actually trying to fulfil those roles.

That looks like someone whose bars are mostly filled with non damaging skills, or if they're not really using skills (e.g. light attack spamming bow people). Mathematically I would (mentally) accuse someone of being a fake DPS if they do the same damage as my dedicated tanks (~3-8k single-target) - in other words, the same DPS as a character that isn't actually trying to DPS at all.

The issue with this "definition" is that if the damage dealer is doing some damage they are dealing damage. The fake tank is not taunting and the fake healer is not providing any heals to the group. It is a firm line.

In other words, a fake DPS would have to try really hard to be truly fake.

Granted, I agree that there is a real problem with damage dealers in the GF, so I avoid the GF and only run with guildies. Since many of those same low DPS players also die to well-telegraphed damage and miss mechanics in general it seems many are extremely inexperienced in general or more so with fights their mechanics are meaningful.

How to fix it. I have no idea which is why I no longer use the GF to find a group. I have never played a MMORPG where the performance of many of the players that queue for to get into a group was so poor outside of raid GFs.

The debate is about establishing a fair definition and classification (for real dd tank and healer).

People on affirmative side do not agree that 1 dps make a person real dd.

I doubt there is anyone who is only doing one dps in dungeons. They would have to just stand there doing nothing most of the time in which case they are probably a troll. Trolls in the GF are not what this thread is about.

In other words, thx for verifying the accuracy of my comment that a low dps damage dealer is still a damage dealer.

Have you read the comments from others on the negative side? Clearly “1 dps make it real” is what they are pushing

I see no need to read every single comment made. However, if they do 1 DPS they are still dealing damage which makes them a damage dealer by definition. In reality, someone doing that little damage is a troll as it takes a lot of work to keep damage that low.

Most of the comments trying to define fake DPS are nothing more than describing what someone thinks is pitiful DPS but it is far from fake. They are just not very good, far from it. People who want to avoid such poor performers need to pre-form their group. The experiences I have had running with my guild are far superior to the best experience I had when I used to use the GF to get groups.

“Doing 1 dps make them real dd” is your definition of roles, this is not accepted by us on the affirmative side. This is the exact topic we are debating.

And our main counter to your definition is: such definition is fundamentally discriminatory against tanks, it is requiring tank to do what dd does, and more.

And we desire equality.

I see no reason to discuss a theoretical that will never happen unless the player is a troll and such a discussion will solve nothing.

Normalizing having expectations for people in dd role, normalizing kicking people who don’t contribute enough, treating people in different roles equally, there is plenty to gain for us on the affirmative side.

Add to that, I'd like to be able to discuss my experiences in the queue without being dragged into a semantical debate. If the playerbase had a normalized definition, maybe that wouldn't happen as often.

For me, fake role is someone who queues into a role they aren't built to fulfill. And that applies to any role.

the1andonlyskwex wrote: »

ForzaRammer wrote: »

Blood_again wrote: »

ForzaRammer wrote: »

Do we need to have a discussion about prerequisites of prerequisites is still prerequisites?

Let me use your analogy here, “johnny (dd) is getting paid for just moving his legs, we make the same money, why you require me (tank) to unload the truck on top of moving my legs?”

This is exactly what workplace discrimination looks like.

I can’t change the game design, it is way easier to make it fair by “requiring johnny to move his legs at least 3 times as much as i do”

I'll expand my analogy. If johny joined a team as a beer-bringer, he's responsibility is moving his legs. It is OK that he does just this.
If he moves his legs as fast as high-loaded you, he's a bad bringer. If he went in the opposite side because he didn't know where the beer is, if he fell and lost the beer, he's extremely bad. I would vote kick him from party for doing his job bad.
Still he's doing his job if he went for beer. He's not fake.
Setting the chair and smoking in the middle of encounter instead of going for beer makes him fake. Not his speed.

I see we are talking about the reward now. It is totally different topic and I agree that it is unfair in ESO. That is where the discrimination hides, not in roles.
Low dps and high dps DDs get the same reward in the end. Tank who kept 10 daedroths gets the same reward as 5k dps dd who hardly ever scratched the boss. Fake healer who slotted no heals and casted no heals gets the same reward that the tank who did all the hard job while self-healing. Soloing a dungeon brings the same reward as making it in 4-people group. It is frustrating and it is unfair.
I would like to see bonus rewards for doing more damage, for healing more health points, for mitigating more incoming damage, even for ressing group mates. Any kind of bonuses that reward additional work and push people to do their work better. That would make the game fair, not declaring bad dd as fake, not loading the simple roles with numbers and relations.

As for changing the game design, I would discuss if it is real to affect the design solutions as a user. But it is a sensitive question for many, so I won't.

BTW would you like to post your triad of role definitions, so we can compare and choose more fair, more simple, more obvious among them? It will stimulate the debates, I guess.

Your analogy:
Job responsibilities for position 1(me): move my legs and carry stuff
Job responsibilities for position 2(johnny): just move his legs
And now both position make same wage.

At least you support performance bonus. The thing is my base wage should already be higher than johnny’s, because of your job descriptions. Even if we both do the bare minimum, my work is still more thus I should make more.

Do you support a system where tank always get more base reward than dd?

And here are my definitions of the roles:
Tank: taunt, debuff and survive better than the best companion can do
Healer: heal and buff more than the best companion can do
Dd: do more damage than the best companion can do

I don’t believe the sets are disjoint, and I believe union of 3 is not the whole player base. I try to achieve equality across positions in my job descriptions, and same base wage for all is just simpler.

But tanks do get substantially more rewards. Factoring in queue times, someone who queues as a tank can easily complete twice as many dungeons per hour compared to someone who queues as a DD. This disparity is why there are higher expectations of tanks. By queueing as a tank you're agreeing to take on a more demanding role in exchange for a faster queue.

Queuing time is a is because so few people want to do that job. The expectation is that you will do your job very well. The idea that you can get many more dungeons done is dubious because the chance of you ending up in a dungeon with an unprepared group is not insignificant. You then have 2 options. You can leave and sit on a penalty which is basically the same time a dps would wait to que or you can do your job and pick everyone up along the way, hoping to at least get a clear for all your effort.