Legacy Logs - A "WorldOfLogs"-like site for WOTLK!

Hey!
I'd like to present a project of mine which just recently started the BETA phase for the WOTLK expansion. The name of the project is Legacy Logs.

What is Legacy Logs?
Legacy Logs is a "WorldOfLogs"-like website providing raid statistics, rankings, guild and character statistics as well as pvp statistics, an armory and more. This should give you the opportunity to recap the raid to either improve yourself or blame someone else. The system is designed to show attempt details as exact and clear as possible and gives you the opportunity to compare you and your guild to other player and guilds.

The goal is to unite the Legacy community and bring back an essential tool to the legacy world of warcraft community.

Please take a look at it and create your own opinion. I have uploaded two test raids of another server that represent an example.

How does it work?
In order to upload logs to Legacy Logs a few tools are required. One is DPSMate. This is a combat analyzation tool and it tries to combine all good features of Skada and Reccount as well as adding some unique features in order to enable the player to revamp the fight in real time. (More information here)
The other is the Legacy Logs Launcher. This one is required to capture logs for Legacy Logs and upload them. It also keep your DPSMate up to date, as this is an addon which is still in development.

You can find more detailed information about contributing here.

Ending Words:
Considering the development time of DPSMate. Legacy Logs has been in development since 1.5 years. Therefore this is dear to me and I'd really like you to give it a try. It is worth your time!
I hope this improves the legacy community and gives you a handy and essential tool.

Be aware: This project is still in the BETA phase. Therfore it might not work 100%. Also some features aren't quit implemented yet and there is still a lot of work to be done.
If you find any bugs, please report them, so I can fix them immideatly.
Also if you have suggestions and ideas how to improve this project, point them out. I am happy to evaluate those and implement them.

Thank you for the attention.
Shino

why not just use world of logs

Hey!
First of all I am not sure if WorldOfLogs still supports WOTLK and on top of that private servers. For vanilla and TBC this is not the case.
Secondly, even if you could upload the logs, this is by no means compareable. If you look at the rankings for example, there is no way in WOTLK that a mage did 100k DPS on Morrowgar with this patch. Meaning this provides a WOTLK ONLY comparism.
Thirdyly, there are a lot of neat armory features that WOL is not provididing or atleast I don't know they are. One being the high filterable ranking system. Another is the loot page etc.
Fourtly, Legacy Logs is still in development, meaning the progress does not stand still. Features that WOL now provides can be provided in the future from Legacy Logs as well. Also it provides features and visualizations that make Legacy Logs more readable in some cases than WOL is.
I am by no means claiming that Legacy Logs reached the level of WOL yet, however it will because WOL - WOTLK progress stands still, mine is still running and will be running in the future!

Also, one thing I forgot to mention. Currently just the english and german client is supported. I am looking for translators to localize DPSMate.

cheers!

I HIGHLY recommend this to anyone looking to have online raid stats for WOTLK realms such as Warmane. Being able to review previous raid stats is very important as a leader to be able to review performace.

Worldoflogs works fine for me. For what i've checked the website of yours it's kinda messy and seems to be inferior to WoL so far.

Worldoflogs does not work with Warmane or any private servers for that matter. If im wrong please inform me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xenima

Worldoflogs does not work with Warmane or any private servers for that matter. If im wrong please inform me.

---

Guilds are still using it. I don't know how they do it but it works.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fluffybully

Worldoflogs works fine for me. For what i've checked the website of yours it's kinda messy and seems to be inferior to WoL so far.

---

WoL was abandoned by the retail community because the site doesn't get updated anymore. Also, as far as I'm aware, WoL no longer supports WotLK combat logging system. Note that each expansion uses a different combat logging system, as Blizzard improves upon it with each iteration. Which means, if what I'm told about WoL is correct, the data displayed on WoL by private server players uploading their WotLK data is not properly handled by the site and thus shows inaccurate data.

Even so, there are other reasons to use a more specialized site than to use WoL. First of all, as I stated, WoL is no longer updated and is not maintenanced by the owner(s) anymore (and this has been the case since some point in MoP when it was live, ~4 years ago). Secondly, comparing data between private servers can be problematic as each server's coding and spell scripting can and does vary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anyone0

Guilds are still using it. I don't know how they do it but it works.

---

We got the working client for uploading logs. That's why it works.

@Mercy
It does support WotLK combat logging system. Combat logging system didn't change at all. The only thing that's different is that WoL also has Wotlk + spell IDs. Note it DOES have original spell IDs from prev expansion.

Comparing my logs vs retails, they do check out just fine alongside with spell IDs and to be double sure, log phrasers, recount, skadda also check out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fluffybully

@Mercy
It does support WotLK combat logging system.

---

It appears to, sure. You can upload and display data. That doesn't mean the WotLK combat logging is properly supported. And it isn't. As I've said, there's a reason it was abandoned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fluffybully

Combat logging system didn't change at all. The only thing that's different is that WoL also has Wotlk + spell IDs. Note it DOES have original spell IDs from prev expansion.

---

All this tells me is that you've done extensive and detailed combat logging and/or parsing at the very most of one expansion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fluffybully

Comparing my logs vs retails, they do check out just fine alongside with spell IDs and to be double sure, log phrasers, recount, skadda also check out.

---

There are plenty of discrepancies. And you do know that recount and skada are only meters, right? They don't display things in even remotely the same way a site like WoL would. "I did X ability Y times" does not equate to a chronological graph that displays heights, lows, timings, phases, etc.

Combat logging most definitely did change between expansions. One of the most obvious example of this is how absorbs are calculated. WotLK does not log partial absorbs, and this was a very well known issue that was changed in Cataclysm, where partially expended shields would add to the shielder's healing amount. There's a reason why newer combat addons aren't ported to older expansions - it's not just the difference in API, but they outright don't have the data. But it doesn't work the other way around.

The thing is, from reading this thread I've seen no explanation as to why WoL actually handles WotLK logs incorrectly.

Consider the following:

We use a Cataclysm log in a WotLK-era parser: Clearly the WotLK parser will not support parsing partial absorbs and will give inaccurate numbers, assuming it doesn't crash in the first place.
We use a WotLK log in a Cataclysm-era parser: Partial absorbs do not get cataloged since they are not present, but we still manage to parse the entirety of the combat log. Which is what we wanted to do. The parse will be just as incorrect, but this is inherent to the log, not the parser.

There is no reason to believe that a newer parser would be inaccurate when using older logs. Any flaws it can have in parsing are simply inherent to the logs themselves, but they will not be misinterpreting the data given to them.

So far the only arguments I've read are "Different expansions, therefore it doesn't work." but I've seen no hard data to support this in the form of a log or a side-by-side comparison, instead these arguments lay entirely on statements like "it is known to be thus".

Can anyone give an example of a mechanic being incorrectly documented in a WoL report? Or ignored or misinterpreted?
Can anyone point to a line in a combat log and say "see this? WoL will interpret it as X when in reality it's Y"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tazdingo9

Combat logging most definitely did change between expansions. One of the most obvious example of this is how absorbs are calculated. WotLK does not log partial absorbs, and this was a very well known issue that was changed in Cataclysm, where partially expended shields would add to the shielder's healing amount. There's a reason why newer combat addons aren't ported to older expansions - it's not just the difference in API, but they outright don't have the data. But it doesn't work the other way around.

The thing is, from reading this thread I've seen no explanation as to why WoL actually handles WotLK logs incorrectly.

Consider the following:

We use a Cataclysm log in a WotLK-era parser: Clearly the WotLK parser will not support parsing partial absorbs and will give inaccurate numbers, assuming it doesn't crash in the first place.
We use a WotLK log in a Cataclysm-era parser: Partial absorbs do not get cataloged since they are not present, but we still manage to parse the entirety of the combat log. Which is what we wanted to do. The parse will be just as incorrect, but this is inherent to the log, not the parser.

There is no reason to believe that a newer parser would be inaccurate when using older logs. Any flaws it can have in parsing are simply inherent to the logs themselves, but they will not be misinterpreting the data given to them.

So far the only arguments I've read are "Different expansions, therefore it doesn't work." but I've seen no hard data to support this in the form of a log or a side-by-side comparison, instead these arguments lay entirely on statements like "it is known to be thus".

Can anyone give an example of a mechanic being incorrectly documented in a WoL report? Or ignored or misinterpreted?
Can anyone point to a line in a combat log and say "see this? WoL will interpret it as X when in reality it's Y"?

---

So in that case, why not use WarcraftLogs instead of WoL? WarcraftLogs is newer, more currently popular, and actually receives updates and maintenance?
The argument against WoL isn't "Different expansions, therefore it doesn't work." If you had read what I said, you'd realize that it's a bit more complex than that.
Nevermind that there are other sites, like WarcraftLogs and the ones mentioned in this thread that is still maintained and better currently suited for the purpose that people would like to currently use WoL.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tazdingo9

Can anyone give an example of a mechanic being incorrectly documented in a WoL report? Or ignored or misinterpreted?
Can anyone point to a line in a combat log and say "see this? WoL will interpret it as X when in reality it's Y"?

---

Not to be a smart ***, but didn't you just confirm that theory in the first paragraph?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tazdingo9

Combat logging most definitely did change between expansions. One of the most obvious example of this is how absorbs are calculated. WotLK does not log partial absorbs, and this was a very well known issue that was changed in Cataclysm, where partially expended shields would add to the shielder's healing amount. There's a reason why newer combat addons aren't ported to older expansions - it's not just the difference in API, but they outright don't have the data. But it doesn't work the other way around.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mercy

So in that case, why not use WarcraftLogs instead of WoL? WarcraftLogs is newer, more currently popular, and actually receives updates and maintenance?
The argument against WoL isn't "Different expansions, therefore it doesn't work." If you had read what I said, you'd realize that it's a bit more complex than that.
Nevermind that there are other sites, like WarcraftLogs and the ones mentioned in this thread that is still maintained and better currently suited for the purpose that people would like to currently use WoL.

---

Well most of these are used simply out of habit. Most people are familiar with it because the site was in use back when WotLK was the actual expansion on live. And it offers pretty much the same level of detail as other options out there, which leaves switching to different options just making change for the sake of change.

That's why I want to know if there are actually any flaws in parsing that would make alternatives a better option.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sixtyninee

Not to be a smart ***, but didn't you just confirm that theory in the first paragraph?

---

No, since WoL is calibrated for MoP whereas the logs on Warmane are from WotLK through Cata to MoP. The first paragraph would explain why a newer log would not work in an older parser, whereas I'm asking for examples of older logs being misinterpreted in newer parsers.

What ever happened to Legacy Logs?