You made my point precisely WHY ISE should not be used. The amount of variables, from other players contribution or lack thereof is ever changing. The example I listed was rife with variable influence on dps. In a SOLO environment, the captain is the ONLY variable, the mobs and or hitpoints never change. The variables are the traits, ship weapon configuration, doffs, captain skillset, and reputations of the solo captain. There he/she can tweak his build and see the instant results either through the time it takes to complete or the increased/decreased results in the scrolling number wall, verified through a standard parser.
It would contribute in some small amount to not wasting someone elses ISE purposed run with a low DPSer trying to "see where he stacks", because the only place the forum directs him/her to, is an instance he probably has no place being to be productive. Nothing can be accurately measured in ISE, because of the variables mentioned, except team dps.
I am talking about pure dps, which IS a statistic, and actually the level of the sponges doesn't matter if everyone is hitting the same sponges with the same variables. In a solo run the captain is the variable, not your teammates.
Right now, the combination of tools being used to test dps is faulty at best because the calibration is all over the place from player to player. I'm not bashing the pioneers but this is a Standardized tool will help get much better result for the different tiers of dps out there.
It would also allow the DPS level/skill gates of progression to be visible. Think of the sortable leaderboard of any shooter game. you can compare yourself to your friends, your skill peers, or against the elite with a lot more accuracy.
EXAMPLE:
Normal Player does n dps in a normal run X
Advanced Player does n dps in an advanced run of Y
Elite player does n dps in an elite run ox Z
Team does n dps in normal run of X
Advanced team does n dps in a normal run of Y
Elite team does n dps in an elite run of Z
The X, Y, and Z can even be the same, but should allow for solo completion or team completion. Just because this is the way we have always defaulted to measuring DPS does not make it the right or best way. Lets fix the standardized tools first is all I'm saying..
Isn't there some star base people use for solo damage tests?
Isn't there some star base people use for solo damage tests?
SB234 in the Tau Dewa block. Added advantage that its heavily shielded, so it gives you a tool to measure either pounding through those shields or for builds that bypass shields.
SB234 in the Tau Dewa block. Added advantage that its heavily shielded, so it gives you a tool to measure either pounding through those shields or for builds that bypass shields.
Sorry, I was thinking that would gimp FAW builds so I didn't mention it.
Jumping in the middle here, with an opinion - They know exactly what's what.
You are all proceeding from the assumption that they are trying to build something which is fair to those playing it. What they are trying to build is something which causes people who use it to chase a goal which will get them to spend money. They modify an element, and their cash registers sing. Any fun had by those entertaining themselves by using their product is incidental. They bought Star Trek because it's a powerful sci fi franchise. They could have bought "space war xyz", but who would play it?
Nope, I'm pretty sure they know what they are doing.
You made my point precisely WHY ISE should not be used. The amount of variables, from other players contribution or lack thereof is ever changing. The example I listed was rife with variable influence on dps. In a SOLO environment, the captain is the ONLY variable, the mobs and or hitpoints never change. The variables are the traits, ship weapon configuration, doffs, captain skillset, and reputations of the solo captain. There he/she can tweak his build and see the instant results either through the time it takes to complete or the increased/decreased results in the scrolling number wall, verified through a standard parser.
The question is what would you gain by it? If you run one (better many different) STFs, you get an accurate setting too while being able to judge the difference some variables make. STO isnt a SP-Game either. At least not when you join the queues.
Its like doing a automobile test in a perfect environment and then wondering why it feels totally different in the real world. You can do that too, but in the end the real world is what counts. So by flying different stfs mutliple times you can get your dps very accurately (or maybe better, your dps area), with all variables possible. You basically can neglect some variables due to empiric data (with enough data) while making a perfect judgement of others.
Another problem with dps-testing is of course where to test? It has to be a pugable queue, so the crowd you reach is big enough. There are enough players who stumbled into the leagues by flying accidentely in a pug with someone who parsed and uploaded and due to that joint the dps-chans and now happily increase their dps with small tips. If you would use a patrol or foundry, that would not be possible. I would even dare saying, that you would make pugging a lot more difficult, because the number of players reaching decent dps would be lowered (due to not being able to "stumple" into the chans).
Another point, like you mentioned, is that it had to cater for most builds, be it faw, ts, partgen etc. etc., so any foundry and such would only result in arguments.
So it has something that is in the game, open for all players and standardized. While SB/Patrols would be in the game and standardized (if you choose some where the enemy doesnt change), most players wouldnt fly it (at least not for pasing). So it has to be a queue.
And then it can only be ISA(/E) or HSA(/E), as these maps are small, the enemy density is high and it is standardized and open for the big crowd (guess why HSX is not so favorable?).
You sure are correct that you have more variables and not a clean laboratory setting, but in the end anything made in a laboratory has to be refited after seeing the real world. And thats why we use ISA and not SB 234.
The question is what would you gain by it? If you run one (better many different) STFs, you get an accurate setting too while being able to judge the difference some variables make. STO isnt a SP-Game either. At least not when you join the queues.
Its like doing a automobile test in a perfect environment and then wondering why it feels totally different in the real world. You can do that too, but in the end the real world is what counts. So by flying different stfs mutliple times you can get your dps very accurately (or maybe better, your dps area), with all variables possible. You basically can neglect some variables due to empiric data (with enough data) while making a perfect judgement of others.
Another problem with dps-testing is of course where to test? It has to be a pugable queue, so the crowd you reach is big enough. There are enough players who stumbled into the leagues by flying accidentely in a pug with someone who parsed and uploaded and due to that joint the dps-chans and now happily increase their dps with small tips. If you would use a patrol or foundry, that would not be possible. I would even dare saying, that you would make pugging a lot more difficult, because the number of players reaching decent dps would be lowered (due to not being able to "stumple" into the chans).
Another point, like you mentioned, is that it had to cater for most builds, be it faw, ts, partgen etc. etc., so any foundry and such would only result in arguments.
So it has something that is in the game, open for all players and standardized. While SB/Patrols would be in the game and standardized (if you choose some where the enemy doesnt change), most players wouldnt fly it (at least not for pasing). So it has to be a queue.
And then it can only be ISA(/E) or HSA(/E), as these maps are small, the enemy density is high and it is standardized and open for the big crowd (guess why HSX is not so favorable?).
You sure are correct that you have more variables and not a clean laboratory setting, but in the end anything made in a laboratory has to be refited after seeing the real world. And thats why we use ISA and not SB 234.
Woodwhity makes a good point, as I like to run several figures based around possible dps w/good teams, with average teams, with poor teams when doing teamed environments such as ISA. This usually involves running many pugs and, testing with premades as well!
Than I also like factoring solo dps by running solo environments such as SB 234, patrol missions, etc.
All of these combined, give me a sense of standardization as to what I can and, cannot expect from myself in any given instance!
This is why I'd suggest we as a community STOP USING ISE as the standard, because:
(1) it does NOT allow for an accurate personal DPS measurement, as it is very dependant on buffs/debuffs from others for max dps.
It's a MMO, though, right? People playing in teams? Wouldn't it make sense to test DPS in a team environment? Course, since there are multiple team environments there - one might think channel gating would be more comprehensive than just ISA for it. Entry into the channel based on performance in a number of the queues, yadda-yadda-yadda. Cause folks are running all sorts of queues based solely off their performance in ISA...and doing well in ISA means just that, the player did well in ISA. As mentioned earlier, that gets into some biased data that's being used for expectations of competency in other queues...which might not be the case. That ISA is likely the easiest queue out there doesn't really help, eh?
(2) it is a team environment, which means any added dps from your party to cut down the amount of time it takes to finish the content, increases your personal dps artificially. If i get in a PUG and fire one FAW volley just to register dps, in a heavy dps group that can finish in 4 minutes without me, my dps will be higher than the same single volley fired with a group that takes 10 minutes to finish the content without me. ISE, unless solo'd by the STO elite, should only be used for cohesive team measurements, not solo dps.
That's not quite how it works. Your DPS could actually be lower in that 4 minute group than the 10 minute group. DPS requires two things...damage and time. In order to do damage, you must have targets to hit. If your 4 minute FAW volley only hits a single target for half a cycle while your 10 minute FAW volley hits at least two targets for a full cycle...
600 / 240 = 2.5 times as long
2X / 0.5X = 4 times as much damage
Given those conditions, you'd have higher DPS from the longer run.
Having higher DPS folks along for the ride can both increase and decrease personal DPS.
This can be highly problematic for folks using torps or even BO. Where they'd typically get their punch, they might end up hitting nothing but explosions and end up getting zilch.
(3) A more accurate measure of personal DPS would be SOLO CONTENT thats standardized already, such as specific system patrols with X number specific mobs, a foundry mission built for it (i used to see a couple dil farming foundry missions that would fit the bill) or a controlled private team STF session where 4 stealthed or people watch and parse one finish the content (for those extremely high dps players) if they, can and analyze/compare the complete parser findings.
But what good would that do for a team environment? Cause it is a team environment...folks working as a team. If folks are competing against each other in the team, then they're not working together as a team. Those high DPS records are folks working together as a team.
Solo records would just be good for individual epeen waving...that's not community building. Making friends, working together as teams, taking turns on point...that's community building, no? Getting folks to play together instead of play by themselves...yeah?
Maybe I'm a wee bit biased there, since I don't care much about personal DPS. I parse the Hell out of ISA, no doubt...but I'm looking at Hits In, Damage In, Healing, looking at the base damage of other players vs. their actual damage. Cause I'm flying support...I'm tanking, healing, buffing, debuffing...I'm there trying to make the team better - make the run more fun. Like I might have said in one of the threads, my Sarr Theln build hit 22k DPS while doing some tank testing...it ticked me off...cause I only took around 50% of the hits. It wasn't how nor why I play...so I had to fix that. I switched to other ships, changed things around. I'm bouncing around the 13-17k range now and am much happier. I'm seeing more and more 10k invites being sent out as I'm dorking around doing my thing...and I think that's pretty cool, even if I'm overestimating the role I played in it by doing my tanking/buffing/debuffing/healing thing. I'm having fun, and I hope others are having fun.
I don't think we will see as many 100k dps posts, and it would also help the devs balance the content ship by ship if that is their desire, as they can then effectively compare each ship build against a standard, solo dps measurement.
The number of folks doing that much damage is miniscule and obvious outliers as to what the population is doing. They have no effect on balancing content in the least. The required DPS for content is nowhere near what those few folks are doing. Hell, it's nowhere near what so many of the folks are doing over in the DPS League. If Cryptic were balancing around them, then there would be far more complaints than there are...people are just making excuses and it's annoying.
Testing in teams allows for APB and the like stacking which will skew everyone's numbers.
Someone who's pushing 9.99999999k on their own will break 10k with team provided debuffs which would not be a measure of that person's own DPS at that point.
A rising tide lifts all boats but does jack for seeing if a particular boat can maneuver at low tide.
This is my Risian Corvette. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Testing in teams allows for APB and the like stacking which will skew everyone's numbers.
Someone who's pushing 9.99999999k on their own will break 10k with team provided debuffs which would not be a measure of that person's own DPS at that point.
A rising tide lifts all boats but does jack for seeing if a particular boat can maneuver at low tide.
Debuffing helps. You can check base DPS vs DPS at CLR. But then again, once you get to High DPS, your base base DPS is even higher than even most players DPS.
However, you dont have to stack APB to get to 10k. Before DR, the NX-01 dealt 28k DPS but dealt 18k base DPS. So you really have to suck nowadays by not getting to 10k.
Besides Base DPS, you got your reputation, weapon mods and your own APB to actually debuff.
Debuffing helps. You can check base DPS vs DPS at CLR. But then again, once you get to High DPS, your base base DPS is even higher than even most players DPS.
However, you dont have to stack APB to get to 10k. Before DR, the NX-01 dealt 28k DPS but dealt 18k base DPS. So you really have to suck nowadays by not getting to 10k.
Besides Base DPS, you got your reputation, weapon mods and your own APB to actually debuff.
Right, but if you're measuring your DPS on targets with debuffs that aren't your own and or if you are benefiting from buffs that are not your own that DPS is *not* solely your own, making it somewhat pointless to use as a criterion to get *you* into a DPS channel.
This is my Risian Corvette. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
The average American is not smart enough to see any advantage to even hitting a buff just before FAW, so they simply lack the brain power necessary to get big dps numbers, which are based primarily on synergies of combining powers and buffs...
Just read the first page, but I gotta say that just boosting the lower level players (preferably via tutorials on ship setup and builds) isn't going to narrow the gap between the lower damage players and the upper ones. There has to be a reining in of the upper level as well as better education for the lower.
As was said on page one, ability stacking needs to be looked into heavily, with the goal being to even out damage output. Once we have a target goal that players are happy performing at, then content can be balanced at that level for "normal" runs, and then difficulty can be added for "advanced" and "elite" runs.
I say that we need a level players are happy performing at for a very good reason: this is a game to have fun in. While there invariably are players for whom the pursuit of epic DPS levels is fun, that's not the majority of the playerbase. Speaking for myself, I had more fun in the game when it was pre-DR, before the madness of hitpoint boosts & such were put into the mix. While I've started tinkering to increase my DPS across the board, I'm not having as much fun doing so. I can't imagine I'm the only one that feels the same as well.
I think that players, as a whole need to establish some benchmarks, and present these to the Dev team and say: "this is where we believe we can have fun" and go from there. Dunno how in hell we're going to achieve that, but it's the only viable option I see here.
The average American is not smart enough to see any advantage to even hitting a buff just before FAW, so they simply lack the brain power necessary to get big dps numbers, which are based primarily on synergies of combining powers and buffs...
It doesn't help the case you are stating to throw out insults. :rolleyes:
The average player simply hasn't played long enough to get the mechanics of the game on such a level as you describe. Nor do they typically have access to the knowledge base of experienced players who think they are stupid for whatever reason. Funding and access to gear also counts for something in this, as does marketing. There is constantly some event (or other game design) pushing whatever the new "shiny" may be, and people get convinced that they want it/must have it when it may not be of the greatest value to their circumstances.
Right, but if you're measuring your DPS on targets with debuffs that aren't your own and or if you are benefiting from buffs that are not your own that DPS is *not* solely your own, making it somewhat pointless to use as a criterion to get *you* into a DPS channel.
Basedamage (and basedps) is damage before debuffs. The only factor playing a role here is the time the stf takes, which is of course teamdependend. But with basedps vs. dps you can calculate what your and your team debuffs did. In a pug its usually just your debuffs that counts, as most players doesnt seem to comprehend the power of beta, Sensor scan and other debuffs.
It's a MMO, though, right? People playing in teams? Wouldn't it make sense to test DPS in a team environment? Course, since there are multiple team environments there - one might think channel gating would be more comprehensive than just ISA for it. Entry into the channel based on performance in a number of the queues, yadda-yadda-yadda. Cause folks are running all sorts of queues based solely off their performance in ISA...and doing well in ISA means just that, the player did well in ISA. As mentioned earlier, that gets into some biased data that's being used for expectations of competency in other queues...which might not be the case. That ISA is likely the easiest queue out there doesn't really help, eh?
That's not quite how it works. Your DPS could actually be lower in that 4 minute group than the 10 minute group. DPS requires two things...damage and time. In order to do damage, you must have targets to hit. If your 4 minute FAW volley only hits a single target for half a cycle while your 10 minute FAW volley hits at least two targets for a full cycle...
600 / 240 = 2.5 times as long
2X / 0.5X = 4 times as much damage
You'd have higher DPS from the shorter run. the fact that every run is a different time makes my point. If you want to know your true contribution, solo it.
Having higher DPS folks along for the ride can both increase and decrease personal DPS.
This can be highly problematic for folks using torps or even BO. Where they'd typically get their punch, they might end up hitting nothing but explosions and end up getting zilch.
But what good would that do for a team environment? Cause it is a team environment...folks working as a team. If folks are competing against each other in the team, then they're not working together as a team. Those high DPS records are folks working together as a team.
Solo records would just be good for individual epeen waving...that's not community building. Making friends, working together as teams, taking turns on point...that's community building, no? Getting folks to play together instead of play by themselves...yeah?
Maybe I'm a wee bit biased there, since I don't care much about personal DPS. I parse the Hell out of ISA, no doubt...but I'm looking at Hits In, Damage In, Healing, looking at the base damage of other players vs. their actual damage. Cause I'm flying support...I'm tanking, healing, buffing, debuffing...I'm there trying to make the team better - make the run more fun. Like I might have said in one of the threads, my Sarr Theln build hit 22k DPS while doing some tank testing...it ticked me off...cause I only took around 50% of the hits. It wasn't how nor why I play...so I had to fix that. I switched to other ships, changed things around. I'm bouncing around the 13-17k range now and am much happier. I'm seeing more and more 10k invites being sent out as I'm dorking around doing my thing...and I think that's pretty cool, even if I'm overestimating the role I played in it by doing my tanking/buffing/debuffing/healing thing. I'm having fun, and I hope others are having fun.
The number of folks doing that much damage is miniscule and obvious outliers as to what the population is doing. They have no effect on balancing content in the least. The required DPS for content is nowhere near what those few folks are doing. Hell, it's nowhere near what so many of the folks are doing over in the DPS League. If Cryptic were balancing around them, then there would be far more complaints than there are...people are just making excuses and it's annoying.
Imagined?
Again you fail to acknowledge that your PERSONAL CONTRIBUTION is skewed because of the test being set in a dynamic group environment. The actual numbers don't matter that you referenced, but by doing so you proved the ineffectiveness of testing in a group and announcing your inaccurate personal contribution as fact.
In order to establish the true tiers, you need to know your personal contributions to the total equation. In a group your task varies from STF to STF unless its in a pre-made of your choosing. Even then, your results are optimized by your group's buff/debuffs and team makeup.
This was always about about community building, as vets help PUGS and newbies better understand their personal build errors through hard data that is closer to their personal truth than any group test. These are the same PUGs and Newbies that many vets complain about, and hate to play with in the higher end STFs when PUG grouping because of lack of understanding of multiple facets of the game, this being one., build contribution and understanding.
The math is even easier if you broaden your view just a bit. I fire one BO at the first ISE cube getting the first shot, and say it does 10k for easy math. Lets say encounter lasts 4 minutes because my team is awesome without me and I do no additional damage.
4min=240 sec
10k dmg / 240 = 41.6 dmg/sec
The second encounter I use the same approach, and do 10k dmg in one shot, only this time my PUG takes 12 minutes to finish without me.
12 min=720 sec
10k dmg / 720 = 13.9 dmg per sec.
or
X /Y > X /Y+Z when Z > 0.
My post was about the accuracy, detail, and truth of the information that spams our dps channels, not about epeen. The truth helps for a better understanding of the mechanics of our builds, what affects what, which in turn brings community understanding, better builds, better PUGs and Pre-mades, and better more efficient and less frustrating STF experiences for all.
We will gain better understanding of not only our contributions, but proper execution and timeliness of abilities. A smart player who wants to finish will not care about popping every cooldown to accommodate an epeen, he/she understands aggro bouncing, who can take the punishment, who is buffing what, learning or knowing basicly what their role and responsibilities for success are, all by gaining an understanding of mechanics, watching icons and timers and communicating. The Elite team has this in its own synergy, usually with smarter and/or well instructed players, but its still a team test, and hitting 100k in a team, and saying look what I did personally, is not a true measure of your actual contribution, unless setup up specifically and properly to understand the data.
This is not only about dps, but about buffing, stacked buffing, stacked debuffing, and understanding what stacks and what doesn't. We currently have too much trusting and not enough verifying or all our various data in the proper manner. I just suggested a purer way to analyze, a true STANDARD that cannot be disputed as easily, for the purpose of analysis. What people do with the information is their choice, whether to brag or to tweak or to instruct.
Facts are REAL
Interpretations are imagination until supported by fact.
The second encounter I use the same approach, and do 10k dmg in one shot, only this time my PUG takes 12 minutes to finish without me.
12 min=720 sec
10k dmg / 720 = 13.9 dmg per sec.
or
X /Y > X /Y+Z when Z > 0.
Thats one hell of a wrong equation for practical use. Of course, your single hit will have different dps, but when the hell do you fire only once and call it contribution?
Also, in a worse team you will do more damage, so your X is different in the end, it will be like (X+A)/(Y+Z), but in this case, its not given that "X /Y > (X+A)/Y+Z when Z > 0."
The way to do things correctly would be empirical data. Even on your Solo-Attempt you will get numbers you will have to compare to others (from other situations) to get a feeling about your dps. Its like buying a van, because it only uses 5l/100km, and wondering why it does need 8l/100km when you drive it. Because laboratory (Solomap) and real world (Queues) are vastly different.
If you want to do it your way, do it your way, just dont be surprised if others wont.
If you're using team based maps for DPS comparison you should only be comparing team to team, not at the individual level.
Exactly spot on!
Who cares about the number of shots in my example. The problem actually gets worse the more shots you take and the longer you fight in a team.
An easy example to test. Run a CE: and use the parse window in the parser so its on top. Watch your dps in the group setting, then watch your dps drop, as your group warps out and you are left alone to fight the mobs after CE is beaten, your dps will not remain the same. How do you really know what you did? The parser does not tell you how many buffed shots you took, but the post CE encounter data IS more accurate the less people that are left, but not as accurate as if you were alone and parsing. In the same group setting, if my escort run is spent eliminating or draining shields in the first volley and I hit before you, your escort/cruiser/sci gets the opportunity of unshielded crit hits, see? Fundamentally FUBAR'd for accurate analysis as it currently stands.
That formula I illustrated was purposely simplified to not include anything else, so someone could do the easy math for himself/herself, and the suggestion of a standard dps sponge makes it easy to determine what that console does, or how that deflector affects your build.
You are disputing an indisputable formula for DPS, total damage over time, used across many genres of video games. I'm just trying to get more precise data for analysis for all. My post wasn't about formula dissection at all. My input was about finding a target, targets, or scenario worthy of calling it the standard for test for dps analysis and discussion. My post was to help support the OP's request for facts.
We can't begin to dissect the formulas and analyze what really is correct and what isn't, until we can effectively, specifically, and accurately narrow down the things we wish to analyze. The STO pioneers of this topic (who I really appreciate for opening my eyes) did the data mining in years past, with extensive records of their test method, but the formulas have changed, as must our approach.
What does the Tier X ability of Y actually contribute to your healing? shield draining? dps? does it actually stack? by how much? You trust the tool tip????
Those questions become exponentially harder to answer in a group STF setting. Min/Maxing without specific analysis is the blunt tool approach, which might be fine for some, but frustrating for others who want truthful and accurate answers.
STF's are the blunt tool for personal DPS analysis, and is barely better for team analysis unless you have the same team, ships, traits, BO's, Doffs, rep powers, etc., every run. The Elite min/maxers already do this to some degree. I'm trying to help make the answers available via an accurate, and standard idea, to the non-elite who wish to do the same things as the advanced and elite, and aspire to one day be elite themselves.
The 10k dmg and one volley/shot example was used to illustrate the effects your party has on your skewed numbers, with as little number usage as possible. Any other formula you add to the basic DMG/TIME in an STF setting, with others actively participating furthers my original point, for the purpose of collecting accurate data.
Thats one hell of a wrong equation for practical use. Of course, your single hit will have different dps, but when the hell do you fire only once and call it contribution?
Also, in a worse team you will do more damage, so your X is different in the end, it will be like (X+A)/(Y+Z), but in this case, its not given that "X /Y > (X+A)/Y+Z when Z > 0."
The way to do things correctly would be empirical data. Even on your Solo-Attempt you will get numbers you will have to compare to others (from other situations) to get a feeling about your dps. Its like buying a van, because it only uses 5l/100km, and wondering why it does need 8l/100km when you drive it. Because laboratory (Solomap) and real world (Queues) are vastly different.
If you want to do it your way, do it your way, just dont be surprised if others wont.
This is why they list both highway miles (Queues) and City miles (Solo-map) when advertising the ability of the car to conserve gas, with highway miles always showing greater efficiency, less variables to decrease speed calculations. You continue to make my point.
your DPS will be lower than a rainbow-cruiser spamming FAW who isnt killing anything.
I see this kind of meaningless distinction a lot on this forum, used for DPS shaming.
Say it takes 10,000 to kill a sphere, and there are 10 spheres.
Say you do 10,000 in a single volley, 1 volley every second. You kill 10 spheres in 10 seconds, having dealt 100,000 damage in those 10 seconds. So 10k DPS.
If a rainbow cruiser spamming FAW does 1,000 damage per second per sphere, they would kill 10 spheres in 10 seconds. So also 10k DPS.
If the single volley guy is doing less DPS than the FAW guy, that FAW guy would be killing the spheres faster. If the single volley guy was killing faster than the FAW guy, then he'd parse higher than the FAW guy.
Right, but if you're measuring your DPS on targets with debuffs that aren't your own and or if you are benefiting from buffs that are not your own that DPS is *not* solely your own, making it somewhat pointless to use as a criterion to get *you* into a DPS channel.
The point of the DPS channel is to find teammates that will do that much DPS in your team. It doesn't matter if you do 1k solo DPS, if you do 10k team DPS you're still welcome in a 10k team.
Empiric data and common sense give you more than any formula and any environment could. I already stated that one thing why ISA is used is that everyone plays it and you can form a community with it.
It is unfortunate that only the best dps is actually recorded, as a statistic would be nicer, but that would be some work for the programmer, which isnt necessary if you know how the game works.
With empiric data you can easily comprehend what variable does what and what your contribution was. If you would solo a certain scenario, you would reduce the number of variables, but leave much understanding of mechanics behind. There is of course also the problem that enemies tend to be different, and since most players play STFs or CE, either of it would need to be soloable (which of course would mean only 0.001% of playerbase at best could actually parse), because crashing down kazon or feds vs borg is quite different.
We needed one mission everyone plays and what gives you the most data.
This is why they list both highway miles (Queues) and City miles (Solo-map) when advertising the ability of the car to conserve gas, with highway miles always showing greater efficiency, less variables to decrease speed calculations. You continue to make my point.
And both are wrong (not reliable) in real life, as both are made from laboratory test (with certain tricks) and then given to real life.
Empiric data and common sense give you more than any formula and any environment could. I already stated that one thing why ISA is used is that everyone plays it and you can form a community with it.
It is unfortunate that only the best dps is actually recorded, as a statistic would be nicer, but that would be some work for the programmer, which isnt necessary if you know how the game works.
With empiric data you can easily comprehend what variable does what and what your contribution was. If you would solo a certain scenario, you would reduce the number of variables, but leave much understanding of mechanics behind. There is of course also the problem that enemies tend to be different, and since most players play STFs or CE, either of it would need to be soloable (which of course would mean only 0.001% of playerbase at best could actually parse), because crashing down kazon or feds vs borg is quite different.
We needed one mission everyone plays and what gives you the most data.
And both are wrong (not reliable) in real life, as both are made from laboratory test (with certain tricks) and then given to real life.
I agree the STF CAN be community forming, but information exchange and communication is far more community forming than any STF. That's whats going on here. If you can accurately dissect and tell us all how to dissect every piece of personal information out of the STF parse, to include which specific buffs, debuffs, Doffs, Boffs, traits, skills, or abilities contribute. I offered a much easier solution of a solo test, and to that cause, asked for a common standard that is not an STF.
Who cares if the examples are wrong(they are not), the point is there is more than one category listed for each vehicle on the subject of gas mileage, because they recognize the variables. The same needs to be present for DPS, because the High end groups have requirements, and asking for help often results in personal attacks of knowledge or lack thereof instead of fact finding and answering (see above). What and how do the lessers benchmark against?
My point is the standard ISE STF as a PERSONAL DPS STANDARD and tool for verifying personal contribution and analysis (mentioned many times in various posts) is flawed. You keep throwing team into it, and while it is relevant at some point, it isn't here. Those tests work well for the elite pre-mades, already acknowledged, but those elite pre-mades exclude more people than they include, not only in information but in group participation opportunities by the less fortunate.
To illustrate your in accuracy:
If I start ISE and "bust me a Borg" with a 100k shot then die, I remain at 100k for the rest of the match for 2-3 seconds of work. I could do this over and over, in the same STF, every 30-45 seconds, as I have seen many a PUG do (not at 100k clip), and die. His actual encounter timer is saying 2 minutes of fighting in a 4 minute battle, because he just sits at spawn until timers reset, and the suicide run begins anew. What do his numbers tell you? Is that the DPS you count? Seen this in CE or ISE before? Many have. Skewed parse.
As I stated before, there used to be a dil mission on the foundry that would tell you more about your build than any current STF, as it could be solo'd or grouped through 10 waves of mobs, the parser doesn't stop til the last one dies. All results are yours. You don't have to benchmark solo if you prefer the veil of team STF numbers and that keeps you happy and engaged.
For thought: The high DPS people theoretically finish min/maxing (the job is never done) and now require harder content to keep them interested. The few are now driving the STO development for the many, by posting their displeasure and needs in the forums, with the innate desire to distance themselves from the average people, because its in their nature to excel and want more out of the game. Where does that leave the little guy who thought he was up to par in the inflated realm of the STF where he was pushed prematurely through, benchmarked himself on a fortunate 4 minute run a few times with elite guildies who felt sorry or obligated, gained unwarranted confidence because he got good groups, not realizing he was the weak link, and now claims he is a 10k dpser, when actual analysis says much less. It creates an unnecessary frustration because of lack of knowledge or self awareness.
I'm just after the truth of the numbers for everyone, even casuals, who can't be bothered because they felt the knowledge inaccessible for whatever reason, and I offered up a suggestion to refine our personal dps and contribution data easier, for distribution and analysis if necessary or needed for comparison.
I don't know what you do outside of these forums, but statistics provide an interpretation and summary of data, and make no mistake DPS is a statistic. If the data is flawed or unexplained, then the statistic is wrong at its foundation. Just because thats the way we always have done things in the past doesn't make it the right way today. The formula is ever changing so the tests must change to incorporate all the NEW DATA required for analysis and tweaking of builds.
I never said ISE wasn't accurate for team analysis, just that the data is less accurate than a solo standard, for individual analysis.
If I start ISE and "bust me a Borg" with a 100k shot then die, I remain at 100k for the rest of the match for 2-3 seconds of work. I could do this over and over, in the same STF, every 30-45 seconds, as I have seen many a PUG do (not at 100k clip), and die. His actual encounter timer is saying 2 minutes of fighting in a 4 minute battle, because he just sits at spawn until timers reset, and the suicide run begins anew. What do his numbers tell you? Is that the DPS you count? Seen this in CE or ISE before? Many have. Skewed parse.
If he fought for 2 minutes in a 4 minute battle, his results would not be able to be uploaded, as it would be rejected for lack of participation.
If someone did 100k every 30 seconds, in a 4 minute battle, it would mean they did 100k 8 times. That 800k in 4 minutes would result in a parse of 3.3k DPS.
Evidently, you have absolutely no idea how the parser works, or what the numbers represent.
While its true you can fake it by using a single alphastrike, this is filtered out in the league twice: First gate is, that we use combatime from first to last shot (instead of just active combat time) and second is that you need to be active 94% of the overall encounter.
For those who where just lucky and got 10k, those players can get kicked out of the chans when their performance is repeatedly to low. Some call that elitism, but you would by tickets for Manchester United and wouldnt complain if instead of the first team the junior team plays in there stead unannounced.
As for the knowledge, this is widely distributed in the chans (and the forums, if someone bothers asking), Ryan and sarcasm even wrote (or recorded) tutorials. And again, with a foundry/patrol you wont reach as many ppl as you can in a queue.1
edit: Perhaps even that post was too inflammatory. In the end though, I don't see anybody denying that their DPS is because of a team - I only see somebody saying that folks are denying that. The premise of the accusation is flawed. There is no eureka, no epiphany, nothing new.
first of all the big problem is not from players who have high dps (high=more than 40-50k imo). they just play the game as they want and try to be better and better.
second i don't think the minimum is 1k...smirk did under 1k in a live stream wher he was suppose to show us a great ship that we would buy it. why the hack would i want to buy a ship that does 1k dps and cant get me through a que without dying? imo this shows how professionals they are at cryptic.
3rd 10k is not a good dps now with the DR... don't take it in a bad way OP i fly 7k builds myself just for fun, but i try to have a build that can hit 30k or at least 20k.
4rd isa maybe isnt the best option there, but everybody got used to it and we managed to have a common ground, a standardization, and thats a good thing! changeing it would create more haos...
5rd there was someone that said he had single target good dps but in the end his dps was only a few hundreds. sorry to tell you but your single target dps has to be pretty low as well.
6rd the gap between players from 1k to 160k is huge and the OP is right. it has to be diminished, but not nerfing high end dpsers. there has to be new tutorials, new tooltips for new players. cryptic need to make them understand the game. they standard layout from a new ship is stupid! who the hell was the person from the dev team who thought that putting torps, ba and dbb on a ship is good thing? maybe it is in pvp, but for pve is kind a lame. (maybe someone can show a build with this kind of stuffs in it that can put 30k dps). is great that people want to try new build but cryptic should not suggest this kind of builds as a preset.
7rd cryptic should promote the chat channel in a better way. they are great for new players to learn the depths of the game from interaction with other players more than just a few minutes in a que or on the zone chat where everybody is troller wanna be.
but the biggest problem is the lack of interest shown by cryptic. i mean..come on! a livestream where you show us a new ship that does less than 1k dps? if this is a joke i'm not laughing
3rd 10k is not a good dps now with the DR... don't take it in a bad way OP i fly 7k builds myself just for fun, but i try to have a build that can hit 30k or at least 20k.
10K is fine, still, for all but a couple of specific missions.
I do not usually parse, but it was interesting the group I was in the other night. It had 3 fed no dps tank ships, me, and one of the new fed ships (I think, yall all look alike, ...). Just a basic pugged ICA.
We got to the first gate and one of the low dps guys goes down, someone shoots all the generators (after the cube, thankfully) and the nanites are about 10 feet from healing it when it blows. Close. I suggest we focus fire on the next transformer as a team, and we spend like 5 min clearing all the spheres and head over. Blow the second on in the nick of time, and spend 15 min wrapping up the run but it was a success. Yea, it took longer than it should have, but we did it.
Then someone posted the parse. I won't say which was me -- its not relevant anyway.
2k.
2k.
5k.
10k.
17k.
If everyone had had 10k it would have gone faster and smoother. Everyone with 10k would have been 50k dps team wide. We only had 36/50 and *still won*, nailbiter.
10k is fine dps. If everyone had at least this much, there would be very little moaning and groaning about how hard the game is, how objectives are not completed, etc. No, its NOT much compared to the top players, that is true. But its still more than fine. It would make my day to see everyone in all pugs pulling 10k.
Comments
Isn't there some star base people use for solo damage tests?
SB234 in the Tau Dewa block. Added advantage that its heavily shielded, so it gives you a tool to measure either pounding through those shields or for builds that bypass shields.
Sorry, I was thinking that would gimp FAW builds so I didn't mention it.
You are all proceeding from the assumption that they are trying to build something which is fair to those playing it. What they are trying to build is something which causes people who use it to chase a goal which will get them to spend money. They modify an element, and their cash registers sing. Any fun had by those entertaining themselves by using their product is incidental. They bought Star Trek because it's a powerful sci fi franchise. They could have bought "space war xyz", but who would play it?
Nope, I'm pretty sure they know what they are doing.
The question is what would you gain by it? If you run one (better many different) STFs, you get an accurate setting too while being able to judge the difference some variables make. STO isnt a SP-Game either. At least not when you join the queues.
Its like doing a automobile test in a perfect environment and then wondering why it feels totally different in the real world. You can do that too, but in the end the real world is what counts. So by flying different stfs mutliple times you can get your dps very accurately (or maybe better, your dps area), with all variables possible. You basically can neglect some variables due to empiric data (with enough data) while making a perfect judgement of others.
Another problem with dps-testing is of course where to test? It has to be a pugable queue, so the crowd you reach is big enough. There are enough players who stumbled into the leagues by flying accidentely in a pug with someone who parsed and uploaded and due to that joint the dps-chans and now happily increase their dps with small tips. If you would use a patrol or foundry, that would not be possible. I would even dare saying, that you would make pugging a lot more difficult, because the number of players reaching decent dps would be lowered (due to not being able to "stumple" into the chans).
Another point, like you mentioned, is that it had to cater for most builds, be it faw, ts, partgen etc. etc., so any foundry and such would only result in arguments.
So it has something that is in the game, open for all players and standardized. While SB/Patrols would be in the game and standardized (if you choose some where the enemy doesnt change), most players wouldnt fly it (at least not for pasing). So it has to be a queue.
And then it can only be ISA(/E) or HSA(/E), as these maps are small, the enemy density is high and it is standardized and open for the big crowd (guess why HSX is not so favorable?).
You sure are correct that you have more variables and not a clean laboratory setting, but in the end anything made in a laboratory has to be refited after seeing the real world. And thats why we use ISA and not SB 234.
Woodwhity makes a good point, as I like to run several figures based around possible dps w/good teams, with average teams, with poor teams when doing teamed environments such as ISA. This usually involves running many pugs and, testing with premades as well!
Than I also like factoring solo dps by running solo environments such as SB 234, patrol missions, etc.
All of these combined, give me a sense of standardization as to what I can and, cannot expect from myself in any given instance!
Praetor of the -RTS- Romulan Tal Shiar fleet!
Is the starbase available as a foundry asset? Drop in a few ships and ambushes with replacements and we might have the basis for a good standard.
If its not an asset, maybe we can convince the foundry Dev to get it included.
It's a MMO, though, right? People playing in teams? Wouldn't it make sense to test DPS in a team environment? Course, since there are multiple team environments there - one might think channel gating would be more comprehensive than just ISA for it. Entry into the channel based on performance in a number of the queues, yadda-yadda-yadda. Cause folks are running all sorts of queues based solely off their performance in ISA...and doing well in ISA means just that, the player did well in ISA. As mentioned earlier, that gets into some biased data that's being used for expectations of competency in other queues...which might not be the case. That ISA is likely the easiest queue out there doesn't really help, eh?
That's not quite how it works. Your DPS could actually be lower in that 4 minute group than the 10 minute group. DPS requires two things...damage and time. In order to do damage, you must have targets to hit. If your 4 minute FAW volley only hits a single target for half a cycle while your 10 minute FAW volley hits at least two targets for a full cycle...
X * 1 * 0.5 / 240 = 0.5X / 240
X * 2 * 1 / 600 = 2X / 600
600 / 240 = 2.5 times as long
2X / 0.5X = 4 times as much damage
Given those conditions, you'd have higher DPS from the longer run.
Having higher DPS folks along for the ride can both increase and decrease personal DPS.
This can be highly problematic for folks using torps or even BO. Where they'd typically get their punch, they might end up hitting nothing but explosions and end up getting zilch.
But what good would that do for a team environment? Cause it is a team environment...folks working as a team. If folks are competing against each other in the team, then they're not working together as a team. Those high DPS records are folks working together as a team.
Solo records would just be good for individual epeen waving...that's not community building. Making friends, working together as teams, taking turns on point...that's community building, no? Getting folks to play together instead of play by themselves...yeah?
Maybe I'm a wee bit biased there, since I don't care much about personal DPS. I parse the Hell out of ISA, no doubt...but I'm looking at Hits In, Damage In, Healing, looking at the base damage of other players vs. their actual damage. Cause I'm flying support...I'm tanking, healing, buffing, debuffing...I'm there trying to make the team better - make the run more fun. Like I might have said in one of the threads, my Sarr Theln build hit 22k DPS while doing some tank testing...it ticked me off...cause I only took around 50% of the hits. It wasn't how nor why I play...so I had to fix that. I switched to other ships, changed things around. I'm bouncing around the 13-17k range now and am much happier. I'm seeing more and more 10k invites being sent out as I'm dorking around doing my thing...and I think that's pretty cool, even if I'm overestimating the role I played in it by doing my tanking/buffing/debuffing/healing thing. I'm having fun, and I hope others are having fun.
The number of folks doing that much damage is miniscule and obvious outliers as to what the population is doing. They have no effect on balancing content in the least. The required DPS for content is nowhere near what those few folks are doing. Hell, it's nowhere near what so many of the folks are doing over in the DPS League. If Cryptic were balancing around them, then there would be far more complaints than there are...people are just making excuses and it's annoying.
Imagined?
Someone who's pushing 9.99999999k on their own will break 10k with team provided debuffs which would not be a measure of that person's own DPS at that point.
A rising tide lifts all boats but does jack for seeing if a particular boat can maneuver at low tide.
Debuffing helps. You can check base DPS vs DPS at CLR. But then again, once you get to High DPS, your base base DPS is even higher than even most players DPS.
However, you dont have to stack APB to get to 10k. Before DR, the NX-01 dealt 28k DPS but dealt 18k base DPS. So you really have to suck nowadays by not getting to 10k.
Besides Base DPS, you got your reputation, weapon mods and your own APB to actually debuff.
Right, but if you're measuring your DPS on targets with debuffs that aren't your own and or if you are benefiting from buffs that are not your own that DPS is *not* solely your own, making it somewhat pointless to use as a criterion to get *you* into a DPS channel.
As was said on page one, ability stacking needs to be looked into heavily, with the goal being to even out damage output. Once we have a target goal that players are happy performing at, then content can be balanced at that level for "normal" runs, and then difficulty can be added for "advanced" and "elite" runs.
I say that we need a level players are happy performing at for a very good reason: this is a game to have fun in. While there invariably are players for whom the pursuit of epic DPS levels is fun, that's not the majority of the playerbase. Speaking for myself, I had more fun in the game when it was pre-DR, before the madness of hitpoint boosts & such were put into the mix. While I've started tinkering to increase my DPS across the board, I'm not having as much fun doing so. I can't imagine I'm the only one that feels the same as well.
I think that players, as a whole need to establish some benchmarks, and present these to the Dev team and say: "this is where we believe we can have fun" and go from there. Dunno how in hell we're going to achieve that, but it's the only viable option I see here.
It doesn't help the case you are stating to throw out insults. :rolleyes:
The average player simply hasn't played long enough to get the mechanics of the game on such a level as you describe. Nor do they typically have access to the knowledge base of experienced players who think they are stupid for whatever reason. Funding and access to gear also counts for something in this, as does marketing. There is constantly some event (or other game design) pushing whatever the new "shiny" may be, and people get convinced that they want it/must have it when it may not be of the greatest value to their circumstances.
Basedamage (and basedps) is damage before debuffs. The only factor playing a role here is the time the stf takes, which is of course teamdependend. But with basedps vs. dps you can calculate what your and your team debuffs did. In a pug its usually just your debuffs that counts, as most players doesnt seem to comprehend the power of beta, Sensor scan and other debuffs.
Again you fail to acknowledge that your PERSONAL CONTRIBUTION is skewed because of the test being set in a dynamic group environment. The actual numbers don't matter that you referenced, but by doing so you proved the ineffectiveness of testing in a group and announcing your inaccurate personal contribution as fact.
In order to establish the true tiers, you need to know your personal contributions to the total equation. In a group your task varies from STF to STF unless its in a pre-made of your choosing. Even then, your results are optimized by your group's buff/debuffs and team makeup.
This was always about about community building, as vets help PUGS and newbies better understand their personal build errors through hard data that is closer to their personal truth than any group test. These are the same PUGs and Newbies that many vets complain about, and hate to play with in the higher end STFs when PUG grouping because of lack of understanding of multiple facets of the game, this being one., build contribution and understanding.
The math is even easier if you broaden your view just a bit. I fire one BO at the first ISE cube getting the first shot, and say it does 10k for easy math. Lets say encounter lasts 4 minutes because my team is awesome without me and I do no additional damage.
4min=240 sec
10k dmg / 240 = 41.6 dmg/sec
The second encounter I use the same approach, and do 10k dmg in one shot, only this time my PUG takes 12 minutes to finish without me.
12 min=720 sec
10k dmg / 720 = 13.9 dmg per sec.
or
X /Y > X /Y+Z when Z > 0.
My post was about the accuracy, detail, and truth of the information that spams our dps channels, not about epeen. The truth helps for a better understanding of the mechanics of our builds, what affects what, which in turn brings community understanding, better builds, better PUGs and Pre-mades, and better more efficient and less frustrating STF experiences for all.
We will gain better understanding of not only our contributions, but proper execution and timeliness of abilities. A smart player who wants to finish will not care about popping every cooldown to accommodate an epeen, he/she understands aggro bouncing, who can take the punishment, who is buffing what, learning or knowing basicly what their role and responsibilities for success are, all by gaining an understanding of mechanics, watching icons and timers and communicating. The Elite team has this in its own synergy, usually with smarter and/or well instructed players, but its still a team test, and hitting 100k in a team, and saying look what I did personally, is not a true measure of your actual contribution, unless setup up specifically and properly to understand the data.
This is not only about dps, but about buffing, stacked buffing, stacked debuffing, and understanding what stacks and what doesn't. We currently have too much trusting and not enough verifying or all our various data in the proper manner. I just suggested a purer way to analyze, a true STANDARD that cannot be disputed as easily, for the purpose of analysis. What people do with the information is their choice, whether to brag or to tweak or to instruct.
Facts are REAL
Interpretations are imagination until supported by fact.
Thats one hell of a wrong equation for practical use. Of course, your single hit will have different dps, but when the hell do you fire only once and call it contribution?
Also, in a worse team you will do more damage, so your X is different in the end, it will be like (X+A)/(Y+Z), but in this case, its not given that "X /Y > (X+A)/Y+Z when Z > 0."
The way to do things correctly would be empirical data. Even on your Solo-Attempt you will get numbers you will have to compare to others (from other situations) to get a feeling about your dps. Its like buying a van, because it only uses 5l/100km, and wondering why it does need 8l/100km when you drive it. Because laboratory (Solomap) and real world (Queues) are vastly different.
If you want to do it your way, do it your way, just dont be surprised if others wont.
Exactly spot on!
Who cares about the number of shots in my example. The problem actually gets worse the more shots you take and the longer you fight in a team.
An easy example to test. Run a CE: and use the parse window in the parser so its on top. Watch your dps in the group setting, then watch your dps drop, as your group warps out and you are left alone to fight the mobs after CE is beaten, your dps will not remain the same. How do you really know what you did? The parser does not tell you how many buffed shots you took, but the post CE encounter data IS more accurate the less people that are left, but not as accurate as if you were alone and parsing. In the same group setting, if my escort run is spent eliminating or draining shields in the first volley and I hit before you, your escort/cruiser/sci gets the opportunity of unshielded crit hits, see? Fundamentally FUBAR'd for accurate analysis as it currently stands.
That formula I illustrated was purposely simplified to not include anything else, so someone could do the easy math for himself/herself, and the suggestion of a standard dps sponge makes it easy to determine what that console does, or how that deflector affects your build.
You are disputing an indisputable formula for DPS, total damage over time, used across many genres of video games. I'm just trying to get more precise data for analysis for all. My post wasn't about formula dissection at all. My input was about finding a target, targets, or scenario worthy of calling it the standard for test for dps analysis and discussion. My post was to help support the OP's request for facts.
We can't begin to dissect the formulas and analyze what really is correct and what isn't, until we can effectively, specifically, and accurately narrow down the things we wish to analyze. The STO pioneers of this topic (who I really appreciate for opening my eyes) did the data mining in years past, with extensive records of their test method, but the formulas have changed, as must our approach.
What does the Tier X ability of Y actually contribute to your healing? shield draining? dps? does it actually stack? by how much? You trust the tool tip????
Those questions become exponentially harder to answer in a group STF setting. Min/Maxing without specific analysis is the blunt tool approach, which might be fine for some, but frustrating for others who want truthful and accurate answers.
STF's are the blunt tool for personal DPS analysis, and is barely better for team analysis unless you have the same team, ships, traits, BO's, Doffs, rep powers, etc., every run. The Elite min/maxers already do this to some degree. I'm trying to help make the answers available via an accurate, and standard idea, to the non-elite who wish to do the same things as the advanced and elite, and aspire to one day be elite themselves.
The 10k dmg and one volley/shot example was used to illustrate the effects your party has on your skewed numbers, with as little number usage as possible. Any other formula you add to the basic DMG/TIME in an STF setting, with others actively participating furthers my original point, for the purpose of collecting accurate data.
This is why they list both highway miles (Queues) and City miles (Solo-map) when advertising the ability of the car to conserve gas, with highway miles always showing greater efficiency, less variables to decrease speed calculations. You continue to make my point.
I see this kind of meaningless distinction a lot on this forum, used for DPS shaming.
Say it takes 10,000 to kill a sphere, and there are 10 spheres.
Say you do 10,000 in a single volley, 1 volley every second. You kill 10 spheres in 10 seconds, having dealt 100,000 damage in those 10 seconds. So 10k DPS.
If a rainbow cruiser spamming FAW does 1,000 damage per second per sphere, they would kill 10 spheres in 10 seconds. So also 10k DPS.
If the single volley guy is doing less DPS than the FAW guy, that FAW guy would be killing the spheres faster. If the single volley guy was killing faster than the FAW guy, then he'd parse higher than the FAW guy.
...which is completely and utterly worthless to everyone else.
You can parse 100k solo DPS and 1k team DPS if you're such a bad pilot that the team always kills things before you get there.
So the criteria for "are you useful in my team" will remain team DPS.
The point of the DPS channel is to find teammates that will do that much DPS in your team. It doesn't matter if you do 1k solo DPS, if you do 10k team DPS you're still welcome in a 10k team.
It is unfortunate that only the best dps is actually recorded, as a statistic would be nicer, but that would be some work for the programmer, which isnt necessary if you know how the game works.
With empiric data you can easily comprehend what variable does what and what your contribution was. If you would solo a certain scenario, you would reduce the number of variables, but leave much understanding of mechanics behind. There is of course also the problem that enemies tend to be different, and since most players play STFs or CE, either of it would need to be soloable (which of course would mean only 0.001% of playerbase at best could actually parse), because crashing down kazon or feds vs borg is quite different.
We needed one mission everyone plays and what gives you the most data.
And both are wrong (not reliable) in real life, as both are made from laboratory test (with certain tricks) and then given to real life.
I agree the STF CAN be community forming, but information exchange and communication is far more community forming than any STF. That's whats going on here. If you can accurately dissect and tell us all how to dissect every piece of personal information out of the STF parse, to include which specific buffs, debuffs, Doffs, Boffs, traits, skills, or abilities contribute. I offered a much easier solution of a solo test, and to that cause, asked for a common standard that is not an STF.
Who cares if the examples are wrong(they are not), the point is there is more than one category listed for each vehicle on the subject of gas mileage, because they recognize the variables. The same needs to be present for DPS, because the High end groups have requirements, and asking for help often results in personal attacks of knowledge or lack thereof instead of fact finding and answering (see above). What and how do the lessers benchmark against?
My point is the standard ISE STF as a PERSONAL DPS STANDARD and tool for verifying personal contribution and analysis (mentioned many times in various posts) is flawed. You keep throwing team into it, and while it is relevant at some point, it isn't here. Those tests work well for the elite pre-mades, already acknowledged, but those elite pre-mades exclude more people than they include, not only in information but in group participation opportunities by the less fortunate.
To illustrate your in accuracy:
If I start ISE and "bust me a Borg" with a 100k shot then die, I remain at 100k for the rest of the match for 2-3 seconds of work. I could do this over and over, in the same STF, every 30-45 seconds, as I have seen many a PUG do (not at 100k clip), and die. His actual encounter timer is saying 2 minutes of fighting in a 4 minute battle, because he just sits at spawn until timers reset, and the suicide run begins anew. What do his numbers tell you? Is that the DPS you count? Seen this in CE or ISE before? Many have. Skewed parse.
As I stated before, there used to be a dil mission on the foundry that would tell you more about your build than any current STF, as it could be solo'd or grouped through 10 waves of mobs, the parser doesn't stop til the last one dies. All results are yours. You don't have to benchmark solo if you prefer the veil of team STF numbers and that keeps you happy and engaged.
For thought: The high DPS people theoretically finish min/maxing (the job is never done) and now require harder content to keep them interested. The few are now driving the STO development for the many, by posting their displeasure and needs in the forums, with the innate desire to distance themselves from the average people, because its in their nature to excel and want more out of the game. Where does that leave the little guy who thought he was up to par in the inflated realm of the STF where he was pushed prematurely through, benchmarked himself on a fortunate 4 minute run a few times with elite guildies who felt sorry or obligated, gained unwarranted confidence because he got good groups, not realizing he was the weak link, and now claims he is a 10k dpser, when actual analysis says much less. It creates an unnecessary frustration because of lack of knowledge or self awareness.
I'm just after the truth of the numbers for everyone, even casuals, who can't be bothered because they felt the knowledge inaccessible for whatever reason, and I offered up a suggestion to refine our personal dps and contribution data easier, for distribution and analysis if necessary or needed for comparison.
I don't know what you do outside of these forums, but statistics provide an interpretation and summary of data, and make no mistake DPS is a statistic. If the data is flawed or unexplained, then the statistic is wrong at its foundation. Just because thats the way we always have done things in the past doesn't make it the right way today. The formula is ever changing so the tests must change to incorporate all the NEW DATA required for analysis and tweaking of builds.
I never said ISE wasn't accurate for team analysis, just that the data is less accurate than a solo standard, for individual analysis.
If he fought for 2 minutes in a 4 minute battle, his results would not be able to be uploaded, as it would be rejected for lack of participation.
If someone did 100k every 30 seconds, in a 4 minute battle, it would mean they did 100k 8 times. That 800k in 4 minutes would result in a parse of 3.3k DPS.
Evidently, you have absolutely no idea how the parser works, or what the numbers represent.
For those who where just lucky and got 10k, those players can get kicked out of the chans when their performance is repeatedly to low. Some call that elitism, but you would by tickets for Manchester United and wouldnt complain if instead of the first team the junior team plays in there stead unannounced.
As for the knowledge, this is widely distributed in the chans (and the forums, if someone bothers asking), Ryan and sarcasm even wrote (or recorded) tutorials. And again, with a foundry/patrol you wont reach as many ppl as you can in a queue.1
I didn't read your entire post, but I think you're missing parentheses. I think you mean
X/Y > X/(Y+Z) when X > 0, Y > 0, and Z > 0
second i don't think the minimum is 1k...smirk did under 1k in a live stream wher he was suppose to show us a great ship that we would buy it. why the hack would i want to buy a ship that does 1k dps and cant get me through a que without dying? imo this shows how professionals they are at cryptic.
3rd 10k is not a good dps now with the DR... don't take it in a bad way OP i fly 7k builds myself just for fun, but i try to have a build that can hit 30k or at least 20k.
4rd isa maybe isnt the best option there, but everybody got used to it and we managed to have a common ground, a standardization, and thats a good thing! changeing it would create more haos...
5rd there was someone that said he had single target good dps but in the end his dps was only a few hundreds. sorry to tell you but your single target dps has to be pretty low as well.
6rd the gap between players from 1k to 160k is huge and the OP is right. it has to be diminished, but not nerfing high end dpsers. there has to be new tutorials, new tooltips for new players. cryptic need to make them understand the game. they standard layout from a new ship is stupid! who the hell was the person from the dev team who thought that putting torps, ba and dbb on a ship is good thing? maybe it is in pvp, but for pve is kind a lame. (maybe someone can show a build with this kind of stuffs in it that can put 30k dps). is great that people want to try new build but cryptic should not suggest this kind of builds as a preset.
7rd cryptic should promote the chat channel in a better way. they are great for new players to learn the depths of the game from interaction with other players more than just a few minutes in a que or on the zone chat where everybody is troller wanna be.
but the biggest problem is the lack of interest shown by cryptic. i mean..come on! a livestream where you show us a new ship that does less than 1k dps? if this is a joke i'm not laughing
ps: can't wait to see the new livestream
10K is fine, still, for all but a couple of specific missions.
I do not usually parse, but it was interesting the group I was in the other night. It had 3 fed no dps tank ships, me, and one of the new fed ships (I think, yall all look alike, ...). Just a basic pugged ICA.
We got to the first gate and one of the low dps guys goes down, someone shoots all the generators (after the cube, thankfully) and the nanites are about 10 feet from healing it when it blows. Close. I suggest we focus fire on the next transformer as a team, and we spend like 5 min clearing all the spheres and head over. Blow the second on in the nick of time, and spend 15 min wrapping up the run but it was a success. Yea, it took longer than it should have, but we did it.
Then someone posted the parse. I won't say which was me -- its not relevant anyway.
2k.
2k.
5k.
10k.
17k.
If everyone had had 10k it would have gone faster and smoother. Everyone with 10k would have been 50k dps team wide. We only had 36/50 and *still won*, nailbiter.
10k is fine dps. If everyone had at least this much, there would be very little moaning and groaning about how hard the game is, how objectives are not completed, etc. No, its NOT much compared to the top players, that is true. But its still more than fine. It would make my day to see everyone in all pugs pulling 10k.