View Full Version : If they nerf the Defense of an "Offensive" Class..
Why not the offense of the defensive class?
What I mean, is Im looking at the DPS vs the Acid Slime
in CT.
Rogues: 50 to 70 DPS. K fine.
Monks 40 to 44. DPS using 2HB. 25 DPS with 1 HB.
Paladins: We had a paladin with 40 DPS.
Warrios: Our Main Tank who job was Agro was 36DPS. Another warrior had 39 DPS.
A ranger had 45 DPS not including his DD procs so probably higher.
Granted there were other lesser warriors in 20s. other lesser SK at 15. One Paladin had 19.
BUT LOOK AT THE TOP END PEOPLE.
If according to the vision:
Monk with TOP gear, >> CANT << tank as well as a lesser equipped Plate Class or Chain Class.
Then why can DPS of these Plate Classes and Chain Classes come close or better than a Monks?
Top End Weapons close the DPS gap.
Why can't Top End Armor close the defensive gap?
</p>
You can't take any proof from what you have posted so far.
Include wpns, atk ratings, haste percentages, position in relation to the mob, lvls and any other pertinent information. You can't just slap up raw dps from a fight and then say "see, this isn't right". There are alot of variables in parsing group fights. The only way to truly test is to set up a test solely for the purpose of testing. The easiest way it so find a mob that is same lvl every time. Then you have to consider where each person is for the dps calculated. It would be good to shift positioning to see how each class does from the front and the back. If you want to compare pure dps that is the only way to get accurate results.
Chavr Wyrmbane ("")
60 Crusader
Druzzil Ro
"New and improved with 10% more healing power, satisfaction garunteed or 90% of your exp back"
</p>
I disagree.
Your missing the whole point of the "nerf"
That Monks should NEVER approach Plate Classes in thier ability to be Defensive.
That Monks should even be under chain classes in thier ability to absorb damage.
That's to balance out the fact that we do more damage.
IF thats true, the same logic can apply the other way.
Plate Classes should NEVER apporach a monk in thier ability to put out damage.
The whole point of my generic post was to show the lie at the other end.
Haste, Attack Buffs, Great 2H weapons, do allow Plate Classes to approach Monk DPS. A Ranger did more DPS then 3 different monks.
So again, why can't a Well Equipped Monk Tank?
Why can a Well Equipped Plate do significant DPS?
</p>
dmg stacks,defense doesn't
Chavr Wyrmbane ("")
60 Crusader
Druzzil Ro
"New and improved with 10% more healing power, satisfaction garunteed or 90% of your exp back"
</p>
Fopoodzo
10-17-2002, 01:56 PM
If they didn't want monks to tank, they should of reduced defence like they did, but given monks a proportional damage increase.
IMO monks should still get that damage increase.
</p>
our defense ability should have been nerfed when we received triple attack and better damage table.
<hr size='1'><div align='right'>/Iskys <Amethyst> is retired from eq (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=11510)
Disciple of the Celestial Fists
Master of the Tynnonium shackle
<small>Clerical alt Bitani (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=355204)<small>
<hr size='1' width='33%'><hr size='1' width='5%'></div></p>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
our defense ability should have been nerfed when we received triple attack and better damage table.
HUH what's that got to do with the topic ???
Because if you're saying that those things put us ahead of those classes in DPS then I don't see your point.
Manaux Sanginar
60th Grandmaster Bristlebane
</p>
When I created my warrior back in the beginning of EQ, my impression was that the warrior would be
1) the very best at defense
2) almost the best at offense
3) completely lacking in any ancillary abilities
The price of being a "no-compromise" melee class was that the warrior didn't get anything else - none of the monk's ancillary skills, none of the hybrids' spells or abilities, no abilities that would let him solo, or save him from losing battles, or make travelling low-risk.
But nowadays all of these ancillary abilities are considered to be of zero value, and everyone wants the melee classes balanced on offense and defense and nothing else. My face burns a little when I think about how the warrior's rank in offense has slipped, and that most melee classes think the warrior's offense should slip even further.
I've played a monk for a long time. Ancillary abilities DO make a difference. The monk is closer to being a "no-compromise" melee class than the warrior is, and this status is not seriously threatened by the latest nerfs.
The warrior does not need to be as bad at offense as the monk is at defense in order for balance to exist.
<a href=http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=244323>Zassk (Lizardmonk)</a>
<a href=http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=228429>Sassinak (Warlord)</a>
</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/uzassk.showPublicProfile?language=EN>Zassk</A> at: 10/17/02 11:50:33 am
We need to see what weapons are being used to know how to compare this stuff. Case in point, I wield a Fleshgrinder and a Frostbringer and use a CoF for haste. Both of the 60 monks in my guild that play regularly use a Tstaff and have less haste than I do (between 21% and 31%) yet they do more damage than I do. I average about 45 dps while they average around 60 or so. With equal haste they would pull even farther ahead. I group with a rogue who wields Horn of Hsagra plus epic and he regularly averages over 70 dps.
VI's stated "vision" for how warrior/monk/rogue are supposed to compare dps-wise comes to a ratio of 1.0/1.2/1.4. If you use my dps values as an example we come out to 1.0/1.33/1.55. So from my experience monks and rogues both put out more damage than they should relative to warriors. Given gear differences it's hard to say whether this is significant. That is a small enough deviation that it doesn't bother me.
If the difference is shown to be much higher in either direction though then something is wrong. A scale skewed such that the ratios are something like 1.0/0.9/1.5 would mean monks should get a dps boost. By the same token a scale skewed to 1.0/1.8/2.5 would mean warriors should get a dps boost.
<a href=http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=85547>Khumak</a>
60 Warrior
Mith Marr
(Imperial Guardians)</p>
I'm sorry, but I play both monk and war and I don't see where war needs a dps boost unless you are 2boxing/duoing with a cleric (like I do). As it is war gets access to the widest range of weapons, as it should be they are made to make war, many of which far outdamage monk fists and most monk weapons under 100k. The only thing that kept monks ahead of war dmg before rok was skill caps, which mean nothing now as monk and war caps are virtually equal for EVERY weapon. War gets dw, da, and ta at 60 just like monk. Often has more str as well. All monks have is fkick which does nowhere near the dmg that backstab does. You want monks to be paper bags, fine, but give us something in return. Put us back at/near the top as melee dmg dealers, hell I get outdamaged by a blue water pet with backstab.
another note, I saw a rangers sig that posted in this forum, the sig had a ss of a crit bow hit for 1600+ dmg. Show of hands of any monk that has ever made any kind of single hit like that with any disc/aa ability please.....didn't think so. Monks were broken, VI just fixed the wrong thing.
zathrys
55 master of chaos
vazaelle
<center>
<a href="http://www.mutedfaith.com/quiz/q3.htm" target="new">
http://www.mutedfaith.com/images/shape.jpg
</a>
<a href="http://www.mutedfaith.com/quiz/q3.htm" target="new">Find your Role-Playing
Stereotype</a> at mutedfaith.com (http://www.mutedfaith.com).
[Angel.] (http://www.livejournal.com/users/labile)
</center>
</p>
It's a good point. The only monks who could outtank warriors were ones with better equipment than those warriors...
If they don't want amonk with 4800hp, 1600 ac, UNBUFFED to outtank a warrior with 1400AC, 4800 hp unbuffed, well, they are fucked up. But continue it, that means the weakest little 60 monk using her epic as weapons should outdamage the most uber of warriors....
Sensei Deirdre Sadiqa (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=192025)
Grandmistress of Tranquility
Warlords of Wrath
</p>
<blockquote>Quote:<hr> We need to see what weapons are being used to know how to compare this stuff. Case in point, I wield a Fleshgrinder and a Frostbringer and use a CoF for haste. Both of the 60 monks in my guild that play regularly use a Tstaff and have less haste than I do (between 21% and 31%) yet they do more damage than I do. I average about 45 dps while they average around 60 or so. With equal haste they would pull even farther ahead. I group with a rogue who wields Horn of Hsagra plus epic and he regularly averages over 70 dps.<hr></blockquote>
So neither monk has their epic? Or if they do they just don't use it to give you numbers to play with for base haste damage?
This seems to be something forgotten often, not only by other classes, but by monks as well. True, not every monk has their epic, but ours is one of the easiest to complete, and definitely one of the best rewards. On a raid, sure its only some attack and a little AC, but in a small group/solo situation it is huge.
</p>
.. any other comparison than monk v. rogue to simplify things. Rogues now do far more damage, have more HP, and have more AC. Monks are far behind in all categories; ie. the relative balance between classes was drastically changed.
If they want to balance things, then they would need to put monks on top of the damage table above rogues. Not just a little bit above, but a lot. Enough damage that there is no doubt that when you have a monks in a fight, the monks are dishing out more melee than anyone else. In the current situation, monks are only often the second-best damagers and sometimes third or lower. With nice weapons, other classes regularly top monks.
The thing is, VI doesn't want to balance things. The entire reason for the nerf was because someone thought that leather class tanking "didn't make sense". Since when has anything in EQ ever made sense?
</p>
Quote
-----
So neither monk has their epic? Or if they do they just don't use it to give you numbers to play with for base haste damage?
-----
Yes both monks have their epic but everyone had VoG or SoS (can't remember which) so my haste was still higher.
<a href=http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=85547>Khumak</a>
60 Warrior
Mith Marr
(Imperial Guardians)</p>
<blockquote>Quote:<hr> You can't take any proof from what you have posted so far.<hr></blockquote>
Since when do you need proof; it's obvious that just whining hard enough will do the trick.
http://www.xs4all.nl/~hjohn/swilvsign.jpg</p>
Calvaro
10-17-2002, 08:10 PM
May I point out that getting another classes offense nerfed in no way helps our defence. Also, calling for nerfs to other classes makes you no better than those that called for nerfs to ours. Do something to change the problem, don't become part of it.
Calvaro 51 Disciple Quellious (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=188766)
Ronj 60 Phantasmist Quellious (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=188414)</p>
Manauax, Iskys ment that when they gave us triple attack and a better damage table(a few months back) they should have nerfed our defense then.
Or in other words(to my understanding) if they nerfed during the time they gave us those two things, then it would have been much better received and not so many fucking whinners spewing out factless shit.
<a href=http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=139385>Sionistic Triplefist</a>
58 Monk
Veeshan
</p>
Exactly what I ment tibbid.
/iskys : I am not good enough in english ehhe
</p>
My ultimate point, is that what I see consistantly in a Tier2
is Top Warriors (and Paladins) do X (Say 3<img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/glasses.gif ALT="8)">
top Monks are doing 1.1 X (Say 42)
top Rogues are doing 1.4 X (Say 54)
Warriors defend after the change a lot more than 10% better.
Monks really need to be about 1.3. They need to be CLOSER to Rogues than to Warriors in Damage.
</p>
<blockquote>Quote:<hr> Then why can DPS of these Plate Classes and Chain Classes come close or better than a Monks?
Top End Weapons close the DPS gap.
Why can't Top End Armor close the defensive gap?
<hr></blockquote>
It can
pub35.ezboard.com/fmonkly...=418.topic (http://pub35.ezboard.com/fmonklybusiness43508frm17.showMessage?topicID=418. topic)
</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/umadronedorf.showPublicProfile?language=EN>MadroneDorf</A> at: 10/18/02 10:09:20 am
vBulletin® v3.8.5, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.