POLNews - GM Policy (12th December)*Update* - continued from the other thread

[RoM]

of course the his argument make sense you use the program and don't want to be a cheater. So anything that is not calling you a cheater you are agreeing with. And yes parser is cheating and is a bot.

I don't even play anymore, fucktard. When in doubt and found without straw to grasp for make wild assumptions, gets em every time.

That's cool, just don't act surprised that everyone thinks you're an idiot on this topic, the point has been made a sufficient ammount of time to warrant ridicule. Even if i were still playing it and using it it wouldn't be 'cheating' (break in ToS i can give you) as i would not horde the information solely for my own gain, rather i'd offer it to those willing to learn or not push it on those who'd rather do without the help. Regardless it makes no more of an impact than watching your combat log and making the inferences yourself. It just so happens the parser is accurate.

S'pose i'm full on dumbass for the evening, sleep calls and is infinately more fulfilling than any more time wasted on you and your learning disability.

 

[Uzor]

there a difference though. quest, craft list other stuff you pull from places like somepage are from datamining.

Fixed.

Holy fuck... I don't know you were this thick headed. You STILL think all of that is from datamining?

Wow.... Here, let me explain something to you again.

You can't datamine recipes. The recipe list is server-side. Thus, it is impossible to datamine recipes. Trust me, I've tried.

Quest are partly datamined, like where ot start etc. All you can datamien that's not viewable before you start the quest is the quest location though. As in where you start it. EVERYTHING else about the quest is viewable in-game by speaking to the NPC and looking in the quest log.

How stupid can someone be? Try get a clue before you open your mouth. You're just making yourself look like a fool.

quote=RoM]Example? I've seen a ton thrown at you to illustrate how skewed your view is.

The nature of my opinion is that it cannot be flawed as, and follow me closely here there non-standard argument style guy...

A. It's an opinion.
B. It allows for everyone's opinion and does not require anyyone's opinion to substantiate or validate it but my own.
C. My moral application can withstand any topic it relates to.

In short, grey can't be wrong. It's how it is on large. Just because you live in a black and white world doesn't mean that at base you're not full of shit and can't apply the same moral sets to one situation as another. I can, it's called clarity. I've no need to get indignant simply because you disagree, this is where we differ. It does not, however, make me any less full of shit. It goes both ways, hence opinion and not fact. This is the nature of a moral argument, it's case specific from the perspective of the participants.
[/quote]
Most stupid responce ever. I give you an E for effort though.

It's a personal call how far you want to go calling something a cheat. At base calling the parser cheating is the same as someone calling you at cheating on an open book test. The information is widely available both online and off. If relevence is your issue, as opposed to hell's hang up on hauby's and third partys (hello guides) then the same must be true if someone were to work out the information for themselves as it's not intended by SE for you to know the exact formula even though it's written in every line of combat. Therefore your logic is flawed by the standard of your own argument. The really groovy thing is no one gives a shit if you don't make sense unless you're trying to preach to them about something they've already made up their mind about. The rest, as they say, is silence.

Much better try. Too bad I've already mentioned it earlier in the thread.

However, the bolded part. You can believe all you want that my logic is flawed. It's all a matter of oppinion. Someone on the other side of the fence will always believe their opponent's logic is flawed.

And btw. You see to have oppinion mixed up with point. My point is that parser is a cheat. Oppinion is not. Otherwise I wouldn't use parser myself. Idunno, perhaps I'm the only person in the world who argue for a point rather then oppinion.

 

[Skaw]

You know, the parser-calculator aside - What part of figuring out which item is better is cheating? I've given about several ways that you can do it, without a program to do the math automatically for you. Are those methods cheating? Honestly, your arguement seems to be against a parser program, but not parsing the act, due to chronically chiming towards the ToS umbrella of ambiguity.

So, which of these is legal, and which is illegal.

Fraps - Do not even bother saying it's against ToS. We've all seen countless GMs refuting eachothers claims that it is or isn't.
* Screenshot chatlog
* Video capture exp session
Network Drive Mapping
* Running Parser program on another PC
* Pulling data from log files manually and adding it up
VCR/DVR/Camcorder
* Same as Fraps #2.

Now, may I remind those without knowledge of what goes on, but if you're going to claim any combination of first, second, and fifth as legal - the only thing a Parsing program does is cut out the outside-of-the-game time spent adding and dividing. If running it during gameplay is your beef, remember: it can run independant of FFXI with copied log contents.

 

[Uzor]

You know, the parser-calculator aside - What part of figuring out which item is better is cheating? I've given about 7 ways that you can do it, without a program to do the math automatically for you. Are those methods cheating? Honestly, your arguement seems to be against a parser program, but not parsing the act, due to chronically chiming towards the ToS umbrella of ambiguity.

I've already answered your question. Parser is cheating because it does it automatically. When you do it by hand, you od it yourself without the use of a program that does it automatically. Thus, you're doing it ased on your own experience and your own knowledge. It also leaves room for human errors, something hwich the parser doesn't.

Figuring out which item is not cheating if you do it based on your own experiene and knowledge. Using a parser to parse it is using a program that does the the majority of the work for you.

 

[Skaw]

Okay, so your beef is the retarded reason, gotchya Uzor. I guess if someone does it by calculator, you'd be furious over that to, since thats all a parser fucking does.

 

[Uzor]

Okay, so your beef is the retarded reason, gotchya Uzor. I guess if someone does it by calculator, you'd be furious over that to, since thats all a parser fucking does.

No, because that's doing the work themselves. It still requires them to insert the numbers, which still leaves room for human error.

A parser does it all automatically, similar to a bot. You're still blowing things out or proportion, just like Neophytal. Although I suppose that's what both of you do best. Act like drama queens.

 

[Skaw]

No, because that's doing the work themselves. It still requires them to insert the numbers, which still leaves room for human error.

A parser does it all automatically, similar to a bot. You're still blowing things out or proportion, just like Neophytal. Although I suppose that's what both of you do best. Act like drama queens.

You want easy and semi-automatic with no human error, AND no Parser? Get yourself a laptop. A junker will do. Keep it close by while you exp. Filter everything off but your damage and misses. Open up a text document. As you fight, type out what occurs on the chat screen. No amount of haste should cause you to attack faster than it takes to type out 3-4 numbers or letters("miss", or use "0") two or three times between attack rounds, unless you happen to be one crappy typist. Put some kind of breaker in between damage/miss lists for fights.

Later on, while not playing simply count up the hits that landed, and the ones that didn't. Theres your accuracy.
Add up the numbers in a calculator, divide by fights. Theres your damage average per fight.
Want Critical Rate? Put a C at the end of the damage.

Hell, I'm sure theres programs out there that would just let you copy and paste huge amounts of numbers and automatically add them up for you, and spit out an average, cutting your time down drastically.

Pretty fool-proof, human errorless parsing right there. You will yield the same exact values as the program, guaranteed(shitty typers aside.)

The only one acting like Drama Queens over this topic are yourself and the Dunce. Calling it a bot just shows how little knowledge you have over what bots and macros really are.

To be honest though, Parser programs shouldn't be trusted entirely. You can force garbage numbers in to it with the echo command.

 

[Uzor]

You want easy and semi-automatic with no human error, AND no Parser? Get yourself a laptop. A junker will do. Keep it close by while you exp. Filter everything off but your damage and misses. Open up a text document. As you fight, type out what occurs on the chat screen. No amount of haste should cause you to attack faster than it takes to type out 3-4 numbers or letters("miss", or use "0") two or three times between attack rounds, unless you happen to be one crappy typist. Put some kind of breaker in between damage/miss lists for fights.

Later on, while not playing simply count up the hits that landed, and the ones that didn't. Theres your accuracy.
Add up the numbers in a calculator, divide by fights. Theres your damage average per fight.

Hell, I'm sure theres programs out there that would just let you copy and paste huge amounts of numbers and automatically add them up for you, and spit out an average, cutting your time down drastically.

Pretty fool-proof, human errorless parsing right there.

That's in no way semi-automatic. That's input by a human. How is that possibly semi-automatic?

And yes, that'd be input from a human. Every time you press a key, there's a chance you'll slip, have miss-read, etc. Every key you press, the risk of making a misstake increases. While yes, it'll still be highly accurate, it's still not 100% accurate which parser is. And doing that is from your own experience and knowledge.

The parser pulls out info from the game logs, and calculates it automatically, requiring no input from the user. It doesn't do it semi-automatic, it does it entirely automatic and leaves no room for errors. It's not researching yourself, it's making a computer do the entire work for you. Thus, it gives you a slight advantage over players that don't use it, thus benefitting you, albeit in a small way. Last I checked your defenition of cheating was a player having an advantage over another player.

 

[Skaw]

That's in no way semi-automatic. That's input by a human. How is that possibly semi-automatic?

sem·i·au·to·mat·ic (sĕm'ē-ô'tə-măt'ĭk, sĕm'ī-)
adj.
Partially automatic.

Durrrrrr. Partially because you'd be using a tool to do the math for you. How are rifles semi-automatic when they require human contact? Jesus..

And yes, that'd be input from a human. Every time you press a key, there's a chance you'll slip, have miss-read, etc. Every key you press, the risk of making a misstake increases. While yes, it'll still be highly accurate, it's still not 100% accurate which parser is. And doing that is from your own experience and knowledge.

Again, any typist worth their salt can keep up with the games battle pace. Unless you're absolutely poor at typing, you should be able to correct any mistake without missing a beat.

The parser pulls out info from the game logs, and calculates it automatically, requiring no input from the user. It doesn't do it semi-automatic, it does it entirely automatic and leaves no room for errors. It's not researching yourself, it's making a computer do the entire work for you. Thus, it gives you a slight advantage over players that don't use it, thus benefitting you, albeit in a small way. Last I checked your defenition of cheating was a player having an advantage over another player.

So if I were to Network drive, pull the information from the logs myself, and add it up, it'd be okay? Theres no human error there.

 

[Uzor]

sem·i·au·to·mat·ic (sĕm'ē-ô'tə-măt'ĭk, sĕm'ī-)
adj.
Partially automatic.

How is parser partially automatic? The only thing it doesn't do is fight for you. It does everything else.

Durrrrrr. Partially because you'd be using a tool to do the math for you. How are rifles semi-automatic when they require human contact? Jesus..

A calculator. Right. Parser isn't just a calculator.

So if I were to Network drive, pull the information from the logs myself, and add it up, it'd be okay? Theres no human error there.

No, because that creates another problem. You open a game data file which is not to be viewed other then in-game.

 

[Skaw]

What the fuck tangent did you go off on? I'm talking about parsing by hand and a calculator/averages program to do the math for you being semi-automatic.

God dammit, this thread has really shown who the people are that argue with points that aren't what they seem to them.

No, because that creates another problem. You open a game data file which is not to be viewed other then in-game.

But if I record it through Camera, VCR, DVR, TV Tuner, whatever. It's okay? Mind you, it's all the same information as peeking in to log files. It's all impossible to miss. You can even check back over and over again through both methods.

Nitpickers of the World, unite. This thread is your brand new home.

 

[Uzor]

What the fuck tangent did you go off on? I'm talking about parsing by hand and a calculator/averages program to do the math for you being semi-automatic.

Parsing by hand isn't semi-automatic. You write it down yourself. And then calculating it with a calculator isn't semi-automatic either. Sure, the 75+75 is automatic, but it requires you to type the numbers in.

The parser does all that automatically, requiring no input what-so-ever from the user.

God dammit, this thread has really shown who the people are that argue with points that aren't what they seem to them.

I'm happy you realize the stupidity in your and RoM's arguments.

But if I record it through Camera, VCR, DVR, TV Tuner, whatever. It's okay? Mind you, it's all the same information as peeking in to log files. It's all impossible to miss. You can even check back over and over again through both methods.

No, because the in-game log is shown to you in-game. The saved log isn't shown to you in-game. While yes, it provides the asme info, the in-game log isn't copy/pastable, while the saved one is. Recording it doesn't allow you to run it through a parser program to automatically calculate it.

 

[Garvin]

lol@fucking idiots who can't tell the difference between things going on ingame and things going on out of game...

Recording it doesn't allow you to run it through a parser program to automatically calculate it.

P.S. Yes, it does. In my example, automated parsing of this visual log is possible, despite the extremely unlikely nature (and the fact that easier options exist). It can, in theory, be done, resulting in the same outcome from the same source.

 

[Uzor]

lol@fucking idiots who can't tell the difference between things going on ingame and things going on out of game...


P.S. Yes, it does. In my example, automated parsing of this visual log is possible, despite the extremely unlikely nature (and the fact that easier options exist). It can, in theory, be done, resulting in the same outcome from the same source.

Yes, in your example. But no such thing exists.

 

[Bajaratt]

Yes, in your example. But no such thing exists.

It doesn't exist because there is no need to make one, you can accomplish the exact same thing with a much simpler program. If there was an actual need for the program, it would have been created already.

 

[Garvin]

It doesn't exist because there is no need to make one, you can accomplish the exact same thing with a much simpler program. If there was an actual need for the program, it would have been created already.

Even if the current method stopped working, it's more likely that people would find another way around than do what I've proposed, and there would probably always be an easier way. It needn't exist, it's a perfectly valid hypothetical argument.

 

[Uzor]

Even if the current method stopped working, it's more likely that people would find another way around than do what I've proposed, and there would probably always be an easier way. It needn't exist, it's a perfectly valid hypothetical argument.

Do you even know how hard it'd be to make a program that reads a certain part of a video file, recognize certain symbols as letters/numbers, and then calculate it?

It would NOT be worth it.

 

[Flameass]

Parsing by hand isn't semi-automatic. You write it down yourself. And then calculating it with a calculator isn't semi-automatic either.

Your point doesn't work. I can script a very easy excel workbook that you punch in the numbers and it will spit out all the same info as the current parser. All you have to do is type in the info. Info can be as you exp, from a recorded source, can be OCRed from the video checked over for errors. hell copied and pasted by hand from the logs. Might wanna learn what parsing actually means, it's a very interesting section of computer science. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parsing.
Bye bye.

 

[Flameass]

Do you even know how hard it'd be to make a program that reads a certain part of a video file, recognize certain symbols as letters/numbers, and then calculate it?

It would NOT be worth it.

You can do part manually. Record the video, the go over it and after each screenful take a screenshot and feed it into one of the large already existing pool of OCR software and you've just recreated the battle log.

 

[Garvin]

Do you even know how hard it'd be to make a program that reads a certain part of a video file, recognize certain symbols as letters/numbers, and then calculate it?

It would NOT be worth it.

Never said it would be worth it. Just possible. I actually acknowledged several times the scale of such a project and the effort that would go into it.