Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Feature request: filter for # Melee Attacks/Rounds @ "Extra Attacks" tab #45

Open
GoogleCodeExporter opened this issue May 12, 2015 · 3 comments

Comments

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link

What steps will reproduce the problem?
1. Any Parse
2.
3.

What is the expected output? What do you see instead?
@ "Extra Attacks" tabs, i see, under "Basic Data", the "# number of melee 
attacks" and "#melee rounds", but both apparently applies to ANY mobs 
fought during the parsing timeframe.
I was expecting behing able to use some filter button (like in "Offense" 
tab) to select - for example - "Greater Colibri (144)" so Kparser displays 
# of melee attacks/rounds done ONLY on this type of mob. Instead, Kparser 
displays total # melee attacks/rounds, so i can't know :
a. how much swings one person did
b. how much is real "fight time" for each person on the total and average 
fight time displayed on "Experience" tab. For example, in a merit PT, avg 
Gcoli fight time revolve around 30secs, but in reality, since at least 3 
melees on it, each melee fought actually lot less (very roughly 1/3 of 
30secs).
This would help proving/debunking haste and delay reduction stuff for 
example.

What version of the product are you using? On what operating system?
1.3.8 but doesnot matter it s a request feature, if possible.

Please provide any additional information below.
i didnot find any more indept documentation regarding some stats on the 
wiki, like for example the # hits displayed on Offense tab, took me some 
time to figure out it's actually normal+critedhits.
Other than that, and the requested feature above, this tool is wonderful 
on debunking my ffxi dmg calculator and ProjectXI. Keep up the good work.

Best regards,
Masamunai@Hades

Original issue reported on code.google.com by raphael.morineau@gmail.com on 8 Aug 2009 at 9:15

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author

Adjusted issue type.
The Extra Attacks tab needs a fair bit of work. I'll keep this open as an 
example of
what needs to be considered.

Original comment by Kinemati...@gmail.com on 8 Aug 2009 at 9:17

  • Added labels: Type-Enhancement
  • Removed labels: Type-Defect

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author

ok cool, thank you for the minute reply XD.
Yes, i know this tab is very "experimental" like Motenten explained me some 
time ago 
in a PM, especially regarding double/triple attacks and multihits weapons hits.

What i m talking about is only the very 1st line of that tab :

Basic Data

Player      # Melee Attacks    # Melee Rounds    Attacks/Round    # Extra 
Attacks
Masamunai        2932              1257                2                447

(copy pasted example)

Original comment by raphael.morineau@gmail.com on 8 Aug 2009 at 9:23

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author

Aspects of this are implimented in the new Performance tab, namely tabulating 
the
amount of time spent by each player vs a given selection of mobs.

On the issue of subsetting the extra attacks by mob selection, I'm not sure 
there's
value in that.  Extra attacks are not affected by the mob you're fighting, so
changing the mob selection should have no effect on the results except for 
reducing
the accuracy of the data (unless you're changing weapons during the parse, and 
it
would seem better to create multiple parses for that).

You're correct, though, that the program desperately needs wiki docs for many 
of its
details.  That's on my to-do list.  However re-reviewing it, I think that 
overall
what you're asking for doesn't belong on the Extra Attacks tab.

Original comment by Kinemati...@gmail.com on 2 Nov 2009 at 9:29

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant