Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
5
... LastLast
  1. #41
    Pit Lord Odina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Montreal, Quebec, Canada
    Posts
    2,260
    Quote Originally Posted by Rucati View Post
    Why would you ever need to know threat? Unless it's the first ~3 seconds of the fight there's no need, I've never once seen someone pull aggro off a tank in a raid. .
    You must not be a tank then.. because between myself and the other tank we constantly need to check threat on tank swaps since one of us will have shitons of veng and the othr will be building it right after a taunt. Thus as a tank you need to see threat so you don't rip agro back off the tant that just taunted... yes autoattcking is boring as shit but ripping off the new tank and getting "another debuff" is much much worst!

  2. #42
    From personal experience recount is an absolute load of trash, inaccurate when compared with (my guilds at least) logs, caused people in my guilds raids to lag (a lot).
    Skada for me is more accurate, doesn't cause me to lag at all.

  3. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by ccKep View Post
    I'm a healer, and I care about healing done.
    I'm a raid leader, and thus care about general DPS.

    You're making it sound like it's completely ridiculous to have damage done and healing done shown simultaneously, it's not.

    You could, if you wanted to, have damage done and your buff uptimes in two windows - it's definately a nice feature.
    Raid leaders that micro manage in the middle of a fight are the bane of my existence, not to mention most don't know which is more important DPS or Damage Done.

    As for HPS I always found as a mute point, did everyone live... good heals did their job. You only need to look at HPS if there is a healing issue, considering most issue aren't, it shouldn't come up a lot.

  4. #44
    Different classes, different specs, different assignments, different gear, sheer dumb luck.
    Too many factors to make a simplified display of hps/dps or any other measure meaningful without context.
    And that is context you simply cannot get during combat, nor really is feasible with in-game interfaces.

  5. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by Jettisawn View Post
    Raid leaders that micro manage in the middle of a fight are the bane of my existence, not to mention most don't know which is more important DPS or Damage Done.

    As for HPS I always found as a mute point, did everyone live... good heals did their job. You only need to look at HPS if there is a healing issue, considering most issue aren't, it shouldn't come up a lot.
    Who said anything about micromanaging? I just like to see when our mage gets a decent Combustion on Council, our Lock has a nice chain of UVLS proccs spawning tons of imps, our resto shaman solo-healing 6th Rampage on Megaera and seeing is healing sky-rocket. You're making it sound like all I (or those of us who use two windows) do in-fight is watch those Skada-Windows and tell people how shitty they are. That's not the case.

    There's also things such as trivial / farm content, and though it's on farm I still like to play competitively.
    I like doing more hps through Eminence healing each week on Jin'rokh.
    I like trying to push more hps on Tortos each week. (since there's basically no overheal, log-wise)

    More things could come to mind... and as I said: It doesn't necessarily need to be Damage Done & Healing Done, there's tons of options in Skada.

    Most important point, for both of those addons, is probably: I tried both and simply liked Skada better. If it's the opposite for you: Go for it.
    Last edited by ccKep; 2013-07-06 at 12:43 PM.

  6. #46
    I like recount. Always has been using it. Always will

  7. #47
    The Patient
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    327
    The only number that counts when discussing accuracy is damage done

    Not dps or hps or anything with a /time denominator.
    The reason is that is not a matter of accuracy but preference on the author's part (and arguably the following of the addon)
    on when to 'start combat time' and 'end combat time'.

    Example:
    start it when you start the spell cast, vs when the first damaging ability lands, vs when you enter combat etc.
    end it when your last dot ticks, when you exit combat, etc.

    Then each will do damage done/time.
    If damage done is the same and the same as WoL reports (assuming WoL's parsing is accurate) then both are equally accurate.
    What they choose to show as DPS (or HPS etc) is a matter of implementation not an inaccuracy.

    So for accuracy I'm pretty sure Recount and Skada are on par with each other.

    As to performance they start at opposite sides of the spectrum if speaking about default configurations.
    Recount comes as a monolithic package and starts with alot of options enabled and consequently alot more details available to the user which brings a big performance hit.
    Skada comes with separate modules and starts with minimal tracking done, consequently less details available to the user and a smaller performance hit.

    Recount is quite optimized for what it does but it does alot by default.
    To make it lighter you have to go through the options and disable cpu or memory intensive capabilities you don't care about.
    If you need more information from Skada then you have to use optional plugins (eg. Deaths, Graphs etc).
    By the time you reach the functionality Recount gives with all features enabled, believe me you'll be getting a similar performance hit from Skada + friends as well.

    One important difference between the two (last I checked I don't know if Skada core or a plugin has since added that functionality) is that Recount can optionally 'sync' stats through the addon-communication channel which means it will be vastly superior on fights that involve parts of the raid being out of combatlog range from each other or phased if most the raid is using Recount and they have the sync option enabled.
    Last edited by Drii; 2013-07-06 at 06:22 PM.

  8. #48
    I was a die hard Recount user but have swapped to Skada, the biggest reason was Recount is a memory hog and generates more lag, if you want accuracy and more facts then do uploads to World of Logs.

  9. #49
    Pit Lord Poppincaps's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Post-Apocalyptic America
    Posts
    2,316
    Quote Originally Posted by Lei Shi View Post
    Recount is more accurate.
    That is false. The numbers I have at the end of the fight on Skada are almost always exactly or very close to the WoL numbers, whereas Recount is pretty hit or miss.

  10. #50
    For me I've always found that Skada is more on par with WoL, rather than recount.

  11. #51
    Field Marshal zandiy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    53
    Skada is more accurate, and has been for a long time. I tried both and the numbers on Skada was closer than the ones on recount when i checked on WoL

  12. #52
    Stood in the Fire zanexlol's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    364
    Quote Originally Posted by zandiy View Post
    Skada is more accurate, and has been for a long time. I tried both and the numbers on Skada was closer than the ones on recount when i checked on WoL
    Fun fact: It's not.
    Yes, we are an ape with a symbiotic relationship to a mushroom.

  13. #53
    For me, Recount always matches what WoL says. Whereas some guy in my guild who uses Skada will have different numbers for the same fights

    That's enough for me to use Recount

  14. #54
    You know what, instead of pointless trash talk, just use WoL instead?
    Who needs senseless ingame epeen linking anyways?

  15. #55
    Quote Originally Posted by Reyzzz View Post
    What's the point to have 2 windows open?
    I always have a damage window and a healing window both next to each other at the same time

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Jettisawn View Post
    As for HPS I always found as a mute point
    Moot point, not mute

  16. #56
    Quote Originally Posted by Count Zero View Post
    For me, Recount always matches what WoL says. Whereas some guy in my guild who uses Skada will have different numbers for the same fights

    That's enough for me to use Recount
    You're the only person in the world with recount doing that then.

  17. #57
    I don't know for sure personally whats more accurate but I've been using recount for years (when I bother to have it installed).
    subscribed
    Kibblet Infectionate Serenades Bubblesbee
    [A] [H]
    Taxiporte Restofarian Fisticuffs Blesshu Sinnocence Shoctologist Ellipsis Hiddenfee Teddiursa

  18. #58
    Quote Originally Posted by Drayarr View Post
    You're the only person in the world with recount doing that then.
    Jesus, they are equally accurate you just dont understand that they dont measure hps/dps the same way.

    Recount is way more detailed but also takes more memory. As a healer I only need the death log to be detailed which is why im using skada in addition to the addon death note which is miles better than skada and recount for measuring deaths. If I had been playing as a dps I would be using recount but I would also disable death note.

  19. #59
    WoL > both addons, so this thread is pretty much a moot point

  20. #60
    Quote Originally Posted by Drayarr View Post
    WoL > both addons, so this thread is pretty much a moot point
    It's a fact that 9 out of 10 people prefer oranges over apples, hence oranges > apples.
    You're comparing a post-combat log-analyzer to a live representation. They don't fit the same role.

    To the people saying either is "more accurate":
    How do you define "accurate" ? Who is to say WoL is "accurate" ?

    WoL, Skada and Recount all have
    a) different conditions on when to start a segment (eg. player entering combat, raid member entering combat, boss unit receiving the first damage)
    b) different conditions on when to end a segment (player leaving combat, all players leaving combat, encounter defeat / wipe)
    c) different definitions of "active time", and this is very important.

    a and b are responsible for the overall time and damage that gets attributed to everyone, so basically: dps = damage/time.
    c is responsible to show your effective dps ( dps(e) ). Some stop counting time if you haven't cast anything for X seconds, some if you haven't dealt any damage for X seconds (this is important when dots come into play).

    They are all accurate, yet all of them show different numbers. Depending on how close their parameters are the results will be equally close, and this seems to be what you people define as "accurate".

    Long story short, as has been said many times:
    - Neither is better, some people just like one over the other. And this is totally a matter of personal taste.
    - Neither is "more accurate" than the other. If you say something like this, provide proof (steps to reproduce). Otherwise you're just making up numbers.

    It's ok to say "x uses more resources than y". But if you do so: Provide some meaningful information (addon settings, raid size, encounter, combat time, memory usage) and comparable values.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •