Star Trek Online

Star Trek Online (http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/index.php)
-   Feature Episodes, Events and PvE Content (http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/forumdisplay.php?f=122)
-   -   Combat Log Parsers: Accuracy (http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=490161)

freenos85 12-19-2012 10:18 AM

Combat Log Parsers: Accuracy
 
So i used both ACT with the STO plugin from The Hilbert Guide and the COH CombatLogParser.
What i would like to know is, which is more accurate?
There is a 4k DPS difference between ACT and the CLP in the test encounter i used to test both. On which one can i rely?

xantris 12-19-2012 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by freenos85 (Post 7156851)
So i used both ACT with the STO plugin from The Hilbert Guide and the COH CombatLogParser.
What i would like to know is, which is more accurate?
There is a 4k DPS difference between ACT and the CLP in the test encounter i used to test both. On which one can i rely?

I wouldn't use it so much as a measure of accuracy so much as a measure of comparison to others using that parser. Having said that, I have not used the CoH parer, but I'm pretty happy with ACT. Multiple people parsing the same encounter is moderately accurate at giving similar results.

sollvax 12-19-2012 10:35 AM

Neither
both of them are inaccurate

freenos85 12-19-2012 10:37 AM

What i actually meant in the title was, which parser is more accurate at parsing the combat log data. Which one gives more realistic values. It can't be that i'm doing 10,5 k DPS (ACT) and only 7 k DPS (COH) at the same time. Is ACT somehow inflating DPS values?

redricky 12-19-2012 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sollvax (Post 7157151)
Neither
both of them are inaccurate

And you are basing this on...?

mancom 12-19-2012 02:38 PM

There are currently two versions of the ACT plugin.

The recommended one (v2011) is parsing net damage. This means hull and shield damage is counted and these values are taken with the appropriate hull/shield resists (or hull debuffs like APB).

The other available version (v1050) is parsing raw damage. This means the damage that is being emitted by the attacking ship is counted without taking into account the resists on the target.

Both values have their merits. This is why I provide both versions. (Though only the v2011 is actively being maintained for having an as correect as possible pet handling.)


Imagine a ship firing its weapons at a stationary target with always the same attack / power settings etc. This means that the (average) raw damage will always stay the same, independent of the resist (de)buffs on the target like EPtS, APB, FomM, RSF. But the net damage will vary depening on the resist level on the target.

Usually in PVP net damage will be lower than raw damage, because there are significant resists involved. In PVE the situation can be reversed and net damage can be higher than raw damage because in PVE it is often possible to remove the shields from a target (and things like transformers/gates are unshielded anyway) and also achieve negative hull resist by using things like APB/FOMM/SensorScan.


Another thing to keep in mind when comparing damage values is how pet damage (carrier pets, photonic fleet, mines) is attributed. Since the data structures are not always entirely clear on whether an entity is the pet of a player, the parsers sometimes try to "guess" which the correct owner is. This can also lead to (usually minor) differences in parsed damage. (And occasional oddities when somehow a Borg Cube is wrongly assumed to be the pet of a player.)

freenos85 12-20-2012 06:26 AM

So since i nearly only play PvE content should i use the v2011 version of the plugin? There are some NPCs in STFs so i guess it would be better to use this version.

What i still don't understand with the other version only factoring in the raw damage, why does a teammate do more raw damage, but i do more net damage (alot more). Debuffs aren't exclusively counting for me. APB for example is spread to whoever you attack, so teammates should also benefit from it.

lirdek 12-22-2012 05:25 PM

Hey,

I guess the 1071 version is now obselete on s7 ?

Have you rewrited back from 1062 up to 2011 ? ( as I'm seeing the in-between is now missing in the log)

Anyway many thanks for this great plug-in you provide and the work done on it !

ferdzso0 12-22-2012 11:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lirdek (Post 7200281)
Hey,

I guess the 1071 version is now obselete on s7 ?

Have you rewrited back from 1062 up to 2011 ? ( as I'm seeing the in-between is now missing in the log)

Anyway many thanks for this great plug-in you provide and the work done on it !

well, I have done some testing, when I saw that the 1071 is gone. the 1071 is mostly the same as 2011. there are minor differences in numbers, but the names of the things, are correct, so I guess I can live with that, its not too much of a difference

saltypineapple 12-25-2012 10:48 AM

Mancom, I am not seeing mine damage from your plugin. Is that by design or am I missing something?


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:36 PM.