Is there a way to make KParser choose a session if you have two running? 2boxing a WHM and I can't parse on my WAR![]()
Is there a way to make KParser choose a session if you have two running? 2boxing a WHM and I can't parse on my WAR![]()
In Tools/Options check the box for "Specify process when starting".
Thanks for this update. I've been unable to realtime parse properly for months.
Small problem with it though.
I had to uninstall the previous version of the parser to install the latest version as the install program claimed my kparser version already installed was the same as the newest.
I think the old version was 4.5.something although there is a chance i was mistaken.
New release: 1.4.9.
1.4.9 (December 19, 2009)
- Fix bug in analysis of Enfeebling tab.
- Fix bug in parsing new ranged attack damage messages vs certain mobs.
Also tweaked the installer slightly. Shouldn't block with that warning message anymore.
Hmm... this version of Kparser actually works for me. The old one didn't so I went on with DirectParse.
DirectParse seems a lot easier and more straightforward for me to use, but Kparser is so much more extensive. I'll have to toy around with it some.
I was wondering why the Man/Ridill WAR had a high melee average than me in the Puk ISNM.
Offense detail tab:
http://i707.photobucket.com/albums/w.../bignumers.jpg
wut
EDIT: As per request, these numbers are right in the ballpark of some of the BLM's nukes. Specifically, AMII.
what's the updated memloc now?
Same as it was before, it's on the site.
eugh sorry, i just assumed it had changed with those wave of maints/updates.
my bad.
@Andradi - Ah, I'd needed a sample of that. Got reported by someone else, but they deleted the parse. It's most likely an issue of a blm's -ga spells being misapplied, but I'm not quite sure how it ends up combined that way.
If you could, please open a bug on http://code.google.com/p/kparser/issues/list and upload a copy of the parse.
using 1.4.9. but have had this problem with older versions as well.
i dual box almost every event, but for some reason i'm unable to parse at all. it seems that neither char is seen by kparser. in the past when i've been able to parse its only been when only 1 char was logged in. is there a solution to this out there?
Version 1.4.10 released.
1.4.10 (December 27, 2009)
- Fix bug in Buffs By Time plugin.
+ Add Dread Spikes parsing.
* Revise handling of message linking. Should generally be more accurate now, and fixes issue of -ga spells being improperly attributed.
Version 1.4.11 released.
1.4.11 (January 3, 2010)
* Change reparsing to auto-detect older parses. As such, remove extra menu command to reparse with timestamp upgrade, as that will happen automatically.
* Misc minor code cleanup.
- Fix a number of message association and entity management bugs, primarily for alliance and multi-alliance fights.
Despite the not-very-exciting notes, I definitely recommend people update to this version for much more reliably correct parsing, especially in larger fights.
Is there currently a way to use data from a log and have it parsed? There are often times I forget to load the parser, but have the whole thing saved in txt format ;x
Click the 'read existing log files' box before you start the parse. This requires using logs to parse though, which I've always found unreliable.
Thanks for the updates Montenten, new stuff features are ace.
You're referring to the Windower plugin? I came across that just recently, and unfortunately, no, it's not useable.
Well, technically it's parseable, but the logger plugin doesn't save any of the message code information, which would make parsing it rather unreliable. I would have no way of distinguishing players from named NMs like Genbu (names that might otherwise be mistaken for players, which has been a frustrating problem to solve even with the codes), additional effects would be only a rough guess, AOE damage and buffs would be very hard to attribute properly, plus a few other things would be difficult or impossible to do correctly. Not to mention I'd pretty much have to rewrite the parsing mechanisms from scratch since so much depends on the message codes in the current codebase.
So, in theory, doable in a sort of half-assed way, but in practice isn't likely to happen. I might poke around at it in my personal experiments with a monadic parser, but don't expect anything serious to come from that.