Monk role? Absor, you out there? [Archive]

10-17-2002, 04:39 AM

um, actually, i challenge anyone here who says:

dmg : rogue > monk > warrior

to prove that, in a comparison between a monk and warrior equipped with equally level gear (no monk twinks now), that it is in fact not:

dmg : rogue > monk <=> warrior

that is, dmg between a monk and a warrior, using same haste is so undiscernable that it can be in fact lower, higher, or the same.....but in any situation, it differs so slightly as to make no difference.....(yayaya, 'but monk with epic kicks ass'.....but then youre basing the entire class on whether or not theyve gotten epic yet......pretty bum bullshit if you ask me, so lets say they are in a grp with bard and chanter and they both have max haste anyway)

and to the above posts, all made by people who ARE NOT MONKS, coming to our board to rub salt in our wounds telling us "aaaw, its ok *muffled laugh*, youre still welcome on my raids *long as ye shutup and be my bitch!*" go stfu and suck your VI dick.....to the ranger that posted the bullshit about ranjas needing AA, or even needing to have discs for that matter (to outdamage monks), yer also fullashit......

rangers have outdamaged monks WITHOUT BOW since velious.....rangers are spellfighters, not just fighters, throw their self buffs and procs and other spells into a mix and a ranger easily outdamages a monk (and sure as hell outtanks now too, so stfu).....i play a ranger too, ive parsed logs at same lvl as my monk and i easily get a higher DPS on the same mobs......and i even stripped my ranger to upgrade my monk......both have same haste but ranger has nothing good except decent weps.......

ive seen equally equipped SKs outdamage monks, and ive seen pallys come darn well close.......look at their friggin weapons that they get.......its under a 1.00 ratio, something verant PROMISED would NEVER HAPPEN in EQ a long-ass time ago......and instead they put under 1.00 ratio on 1 handed weapons! wtf?! what do monks get?! our best wep in the game is something like 1.4 ratio, and by then any knight has or is nearing a 0.7 ratio, on a bloody 1 hander no less.......i dont dare mention their 2 handers.......

bottom line:

monks are crap for DPS, however what we excell at is that we have no spells, need no back to stab, and can thus dish out the same (crap) dps in any situation......we are a reliable DPS....thats what we have become.....

the difference between rogue and monk damage is huge......the difference between warrior and monk damage is in most situations non-existant.......wasnt rogue supposed to dish out more then twice the DPS as warrior, verant? wasnt monk supposed to be very very close behind rogue, but just barely not enough to be twice that of a warrior? wasnt that what you released in your own friggin dev journal with the release of kunark and your whole 'class development' issues back then?

stop hiring your illiterate L.A. street clowns and give us our fucking money back...........

now we cant deal damage, we cant take damage, but we are a pure melee class?......um, im at a loss, is bind wound supposed to be that important of a skill to us? im sorry, i mustve missed something.........oh, look at that, i can do tradeskills instead........ya......thats what ill be doing......hello all my name is susie homemaker......

<HR>

/Mori, disciple of the tranquill

/Evarim, pathfinder of the all-mother

/Mythaal, heretic of the plaguebringer

<CENTER>
<TABLE BGCOLOR=#000000 BORDER=0 CELLPADDING=2 CELLSPACING=2>
<TR><TD ALIGN=center>
<FONT size=1 color=#AC2116>
- § ~ ~ Mori ~ Mythaal Solcrat`e ~ Evarim ~ ~ § -
</FONT>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD>
<FONT size=1 color=#FCFC25>
"Peace cannot be kept by force, it can only be earned by understanding."

-Albert Einstien
</FONT>
</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</CENTER></p>

10-17-2002, 04:44 AM

In response to Chavr, a lvl 60 Pally's comments...

Why are there so many non-monk "monk experts" coming her to tell us how much monks needed this nerf?

I would "assume" that a lvl 60 Pally wouldn't be an ideal one to tell the monk community what they should, and shouldn't be able to do, or what they "should" do. I mean do you claim to know as much about the monk class as an actual monk who's played that class for months upon months from lvl 1 to lvl 60? I won't begin to tell you what Pally's are best at, since I hardly consider myself an expert. Yes, I know the pally basics, heal, do damage, do MORE damage to undead, cast stuns, keep aggro, Lay on hands, etc, the basics.

And I'm just boggled why this monk nerf went in with the other, obviously needed, profound nerfs to Wizzies and Mages.

4 or 5 Wizzies taking out a Dragon, who's supposed to take a raid force to kill, and doing this without the Dragon having the possibility to resist this offensive spell, all within a 6 second cast time = obviously overpowering, and trivializing to the game.

Mages summoning an infinite number of mod rods, having anyone be able to use them at will = virtually infinite amounts of mana = virtually no need to factor in mana conservation when raiding = trivializing of game content

Monks, a pure melee class that just happens to have good to great defensive skills, and above average melee skills = makes the game trivial and was obviously a nerf waiting to happen? not hardly......

And without a doubt, if this nerf is to hold strong, the monk class will be forever gimped unless they give us some other offensive compensation for this defensive nerf, afterall, we're looking for a "balance" here right? we're losing a bit of defense, so IMO would make sense to improve our offensive abilities.

And btw, SK's get Feign Death too (2 different FD's to be exact), and have significantly more hp's than monks, and will now mitigate damage noticeably better than monks, so this should = SK's will be the new pullers, monks will just be a gimped rogue as far as his job on a raid-type mob.

I have stripped my monk of his gear for now, and it conveniently fits on my new Beastlord. And yes, I started a monk cuz they were badass, and they could solo, if I get any "well good riddance" etc comments. IMO they are not the class I bought into they once were, and therefore my interest in them has taken a dramatic plunge.

</p>

Wubao

10-17-2002, 05:17 AM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> that is, dmg between a monk and a warrior, using same haste is so undiscernable that it can be in fact lower, higher, or the same.....but in any situation, it differs so slightly as to make no difference<hr></blockquote>

I accept your challenge.

PRE-level 13 monks have dual wield, warriors do NOT. Monks outdamage warriors from the get-go, levels 1 to 13.

Then we get to the pre-51 game ...

Compare monk WEAPON SKILL CAPS to warrior SKILL CAPS pre-50.

Monks are higher.

Compare monk weapons commonly available pre-50 to warriors commonly available pre-50. Monks are comprable or slightly better.

Pre-50s, the higher atk rating and the higher weapon skills put monk damage above warrior.

IN THE 50s ... MONK WEAPON SKILL CAPS tend to always be a step ahead of warrior weapon skill caps until level 60.

Monks get a higher damage table at 55 and 60.

Monks and warriors get triple attack at 60. Monks still have that higher damage table.

Monk weapons in the high end game tend to be superior in damage output than warrior weapons.

Warriors are forced to sacrifice some DPS in order to use enraging blow weapons to maintain aggro when you get into the AoW and beyond game.

Monks have Flying Kick as a special attack, which does more damage over time than the warrior options of SLAM and KICK.

Overall, from level 1 to level 60 and beyond, monks have held a DPS EDGE over warriors of the same level and same haste. Be it from dual wield in the early days ... higher skill caps in the middle levels or higher damage table in the end game.

NOW, that being said ... monks SHOULD do more damage than warriors. Or else there'd be no reason to PLAY a monk as a warrior would be the superior selection if they had higher DPS.

-Wu

</p>

10-17-2002, 05:53 AM

The issue here is that there are two types of monks. You have the extremely well equipped monk and then you have the average monk. But even then, that doesnt change anything. A monk with high level gear compared to a warrior with the same level of gear, OR a mid level monk with gear compared to a mid level warrior with comparible gear will be pretty much equal. I was talking to a monk today in our local uber guild and he said that the damage difference between a monk and a warrior (in the end game) with equal gear, was about 5%. You say our role is "puller, FD, mend". What happens when verant, who already stated that mobs were never intended to be "pulled", decides to change something else. We've already seen it, FD is nothing like it was in its original form. So many things have changed with aggro, and how FD effects mobs. You say we have alot of discipline abilities that help us. Offensively, we have 2 disciplines that are remotely worth using. Innerflame and hundred fist. Inner flame just gives us a x3 damage for about 18 seconds, and hundred fist gives a haste boost for about the same time. Thunderkick, Silent fist and Ashen hand are all pretty much never used (thuderkick is used as a novelty, but nothing more). Defensively, our most useful disc for pulling is stonestance, which halves damage taken for about 18ish seconds. Whirlwind (riposte disc) and voiddance have long reuse timers, so they are not really effective for pulling. So, of all our discs that we have, only 3 are really used commonly, the others are either novelty or only used in dire situations.

You also mention that we have so many available equipment options. While monks are certainly getting better gear (with the release of velious and luclin), I think were still behind the curve as far as gear is concerned. One reason is because monks are limited to blunting weapons, while other tanks are able to use any type of weapon. Combine that with the fact that alot of the really good blunt weapons are also usable by other melee classes, kinda makes it a moot point. Going back to equal monk vs. equal warrior in dps, the gap there is sometimes not very large, so to say monks offense is overpowered can be misleading somewhat. I see rangers going 900+ crits with their bows, I hear of paladins doing 1500-3000+ damage to undead mobs with slay undead (granted that is situational). You dont see many monks being able to pull off those kind of crits, or that kind of damage in general (granted, im speaking from the mid-range monk point of view).

I'm all for warriors getting a boost, and it's great that they got one, will make high level mob encounters that much easier, however, it was done at the monks' expense, which I think could have been done differently.

Many times people have stated that you dont see monks tanking in high end raids, and that is true. I doubt you will ever see a guild choose a monk to tank vindicator, statue, AoW, Ntov, sleepers or VT mobs. In xp groups, yeah, a monk can tank in a cinch, but so can warriors, pallys, sometimes rangers and maybe even rogues.

From what ive heard, the mid-range monks are feeling it more than the upper end monks. This is where the patch went wrong. They didnt solve the problem at hand. The problem wasnt with mid-range monks, it was with uber monks who were able to get close to 1500AC and 6k hps, and were able to stand toe to toe with alot of the upper end mobs.

I dont hold anything against uber monks, they spent their time to get where they are, however, this whole ordeal didnt fix the problem. It may have dilluted it a bit, but uber monks will mostly likely continue being able to do what they have done before, while mid range monks will end up having it harder. So, what was fixed?

Now then, the damage is done, and it's unlikely they are going to change or reverse what has already been done. What can they do about it? Well, for starters, why not increase monks offensive power enough so that they were at the same point of soloability as they were before, and this will put them enough ahead of warriors to justify the nerf (5% damage difference isnt enough of a gap, and at its current state, warriors now have the best of both worlds, better damage mitigation, better AC, better hps, and equal and sometimes better offense). This will allow monks to solo as effectively as they did before, but they will not be able to tank like some of them were able to.

I believe that every class has it's place, and that no class should be more powerful than any other, everyone should be equally powerful, but each class should be powerful in the job they are meant to perform. Sure, we'd all like our characters to be the most powerful class in the game, but that isnt going to happen, and wouldnt lend to a fair and balanced game. If monks are to have damage mitigation equal to that of a ranger, paladin, or a chain class, then our offense should be boosted beyond them to offset those classes having magical abilities or having much more powerful special attacks.

http://www.cox-internet.com/tgxweb/ezboard/grigglogo.jpg

My Profile (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=340730)</p>

10-17-2002, 05:59 AM

pre lvl 13 monks get dual wield.....a warrior can use a 2 hander and outdamage a monk because of a little thing called DAMAGE CAP........

sorry buddy

next argument.......compare monk weapon skills to war wep skills...pre-50? um, they are the same, with regard to HTH being higher, yet, if any monk uses fists (like they should), they are out of the competition on SUCKING anyway.......what it in fact is, is that warriors slow down in leveling their wep skills at level 40, yet monks continue to get the 5 per lvl all the way on up, with bonus caps removed here and there...

hybrids suffer from the same thing on an even larger scale, they dont gain wep skills from 40 to 50 at all, they are already at 200 at 40, and dont get to go over until 51......(or 50? im not sure)

what do weapon skills relate to? they relate to MISSES.....so yes, someone who misses less will do more damage......i give you that one.....but then you go on to say that monk weps are equal to or better in ratio/effects then warrior weps available at the same lvl? what are you smoking? super-wu-tang-asian-herb? mr lvl 30 monk with a fighting baton is a twink, buddy.......where the hell do you think monks can even GET actual WEAPONS before lvl 30 anyway? less we wanna use store bought staves (which were fun to run around with in beta looking cool).......im not including luclin, luclin is new and has fucked up EQ beyond repair as we are seeing now anyway, so all the HTH weps dont count (could count in all the war weps up there then too but i dont know luclin well enough). i think its time you try playing monk again using only what you can personally rip off a cold dead corpse.......youll be outdamaged by untwinked warriors your entire life......

monk fists are a joke, but thats what youre gonna rely on......

sorry buddy

next argument......after 50 monk skill caps take a leap over warriors again, to make up for some of the nonsense theyve had to put up with.....they even get a higher dmg table (which NOBODY knows the effects of), and they even get upgrades to their fists (which are equivalent, at lvl 50, to that fighting baton i mentioned)

monk weapons in the high end game, you say, seem to be superior to dmg output then war weps? well i dunno what CRACK yer smoking now, but how do you calculate damage output of a wep? the only way _I_ know how to do that, realistically, is by calculating its ratio and stat/proc effects.......and in this realistic way to compare weapons damage output, monk weps dont even come close to warrior weps........the best droppable monk weps in the game right now will get you looking at the 2 lifeproc weps (the katar and ulak, of which i use).....having BOTH a LOWER ratio then your common fleshgringer, which is not even close to being the best droppable wep in the game and even comes off a lower lvl encounter.....not only do they both have lower ratio, but they both have less dmg proc, but lets disregard procs for the moment and give monks benefit of the doubt (something we'll have to do alot if we want to actually try and make monks 'seem reasaonble at melee dmg')

sorry buddy

next argument......monks have flying kick......yup, you win this one...not even gonna touch it.......except to say that when a warrior stuns an opponent, with slam lets say, the opponent CANNOT USE DEFENSIVE SKILLS......such as dodge block etc (the war can still miss of course)......this works on NPCs, dunno if it works in duels, used to all across the board (as dueling was considered targetting an NPC, but PvP servers needed that to be changed or every wizard/necro would just own joo).....however, i still agree that monks over time do more damage with FK then a warrior can even hope to do with slam or kick (even though war will do considerably more dmg after a successful slam)

one thing you neglect is that wars all throughout the game will have more str then a monk.....good wars will also have more dex......good wars will also do lots of crits.......this added up gives them an equalizer in the fact that monks will have higher skill caps........in the END END END game, both monk and war have maxed str and dex, so a monk outdamaegs a war.....especially one that followed your example in sacrificing DPS to enable him to hold aggro etc.....

if a war WANTED to, however, (and this is the case with 99% of players from 1 to 55, until they start getting into end game), he/she could easily equip him/herself to outdamage a monk in 9 out of 10 situations.......

sorry buddy........i think you need to wake up

<HR>

/Mori, disciple of the tranquill

/Evarim, pathfinder of the all-mother

/Mythaal, heretic of the plaguebringer

<CENTER>
<TABLE BGCOLOR=#000000 BORDER=0 CELLPADDING=2 CELLSPACING=2>
<TR><TD ALIGN=center>
<FONT size=1 color=#AC2116>
- § ~ ~ Mori ~ Mythaal Solcrat`e ~ Evarim ~ ~ § -
</FONT>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD>
<FONT size=1 color=#FCFC25>
"Peace cannot be kept by force, it can only be earned by understanding."

-Albert Einstien
</FONT>
</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</CENTER></p>

Fopoodzo

10-17-2002, 06:03 AM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> We're still the best at non-situational damage, and Verant has always stated this to be our role, as you might remember from when our fists were improved just before Kunark.<hr></blockquote>

I could live with that, however monk damage needs to be increased by the same amount defence was nerfed.

Otherwise monks are just weak rogues.

</p>

10-17-2002, 08:09 AM

*hiccup*

</p>

10-17-2002, 08:33 AM

umm dont forget pallies with slay3 against undead mobs seen em hit for 1800 with that....

</p>

10-17-2002, 09:25 AM

All my fellow monks will have to pardon me here...I just quit smoking so I'm pretty much agg'n on anything in site. Unfortunately, it's us monks that have aggro atm =P

Anyway...here goes...

Rogue now tanks better than a monk. Not bloody likely. Please post some extensive numbers that show comparably equipped rogues are now taking less damage than monks.

Frankly, the major impact that I can tell from this patch so far is Monks went from being able to solo *hands-down better* than any other comparably equipped melee class...to being able to only solo *as well or better* than any comparably equipped melee class. That's it.

Really, all this talk about the patch hitting the wrong group of monks seems further and further off the more info that comes in. Hearing people complain about not being able to solo crap that no other melee class would dream of being able to take with similar equip/level is ridiculous. I think across the board people are seeing that they can still solo level appropriate mobs without much difficulty. There's no way common 60 xp mobs should be able to make a dent in top-end monks. Equip still has to have *some* value. It's only in raid pulling (to some degree) and down the line in PoP (assuming mobs scale with pc level increase) that they should start to feel any of this. And since the changes don't appear all that large to begin with, I doubt you'll hear that much complaining from them.

The more I see the details of most peoples complaints, the more I realize that we *were* way out of balance.

On the other hand...the solo path from 60 to 65 for an avg monk could be downright painful if there isn't some a good amount of readily available upgrades in PoP. While soloing at 60 is a little harder now, you take that same monk and make him have to fight harder mobs without decent upgrades and the problem's will definitely be amplified. If not done correctly, that will be the *real* area where VI got us in all of this.

Anyway, flame away...

Daishan

Grandmaster

Zeb

</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/udaishanozeb.showPublicProfile?language=EN>DaiShan o Zeb</A> at: 10/17/02 5:26:49 am

10-17-2002, 09:33 AM

Puller, FD and Mend as that Pally said above. Obviously, he wasnt around for the FD sit in, when VI said that FD pulling is "NOT in the Vision". We are now basing our class on skill that we adapted and was never "intended"? Yea thats great....lets bring that to the light so VI can figure out a way to fix that "issue" since its been broken from day 1.

/rant off Sorry, just venting =)

Zennrik (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=68634)

60 Grandmaster

Dark Templars

Xegony

</p>

10-17-2002, 09:37 AM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>

umm dont forget pallies with slay3 against undead mobs seen em hit for 1800 with that....

<hr></blockquote>

If as the Paladin says, high damage means one should not be a good or even acceptable tank then the solution is clear. The disgust paladins feel at being touched by undead mobs should mean they take triple damage. That would be the only fair solution.

</p>

10-17-2002, 09:37 AM

Actually, ill change my above, and our role now is to get by the best we can with what we have. Just shows what kind of character makeup the RL people behind the monk toon are. We will overcome this also.

Zennrik (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=68634)

60 Grandmaster

Dark Templars

Xegony

</p>

10-17-2002, 09:40 AM

I can still solo the stuff I soloed before the patch. works for me.

</p>

10-17-2002, 09:54 AM

I have lurked around these boards for more than 2 years, gleaning much wisdom but posting very little. My monk was created when Kunark came out (Iksar, of course). I chose this char because I have something called a RL with obligations/responsiblities and have limited play time. Melee play style appealed to me but I did not have the time to waste sitting /lfg on so I wanted a class that COULD solo. Enter the monk. At the current time I am a blue away from 56, epic'd and have decent equipment (approx 1080 ac and 2400 hp) and yes my soloing ability has been adversely affected (no, do not have a parser but it is painfully obvious when mobs I could kill fairly easy pre-patch are now handing me my ass). I will go as far to say that there may be some high end monk unbalancing in the game now (I will never see NToV and higher zones) and perhaps even some perceived unbalancing with the new expansion coming out but, as usual, VERANT CREATED IT (see several other excellent posts on this topic). The solution is to fix the real problem, which this patch definately did not do. To all you fucktard non-monks who say that we are "overpowered" and "I haven't been able to solo since I was level 30 so why should you" and all the other bullshit I have seen you spouting on this board...STFU. If you want to whine about not being able to solo, roll up a char that CAN solo instead of crying about the classes that can. This is a fucking game and I pay my monthly fees just like everyone else. If I only have time to pop on for brief sessions to get a little solo exp then that is my perogative and should be an option. If not what the dipshits at Verant have in mind for "The Vision" then they need to emphasize that from the get go...a nice little warning on the game packaging, "this game is NOT intended for the casual gamer and soloing is NOT condoned or supported in any way" or something to that effect. If Verant does not want people like me playing their game then that is fine by me. I will stick around a bit longer to see what the bottom line is as the dust settles but I have one foot out the door and do not plan on looking back.

</p>

10-17-2002, 09:57 AM

Which specific mobs are you unable to solo now that you could previously?

Daishan

Grandmaster

Zeb

</p>

10-17-2002, 10:05 AM

Have not been back on yet to see if maybe something was slipped to us in the make up patch last night without them noting it. Just had a question. I've seen where Absor posted twice in a previous thread, does he visit this site often? or was that a fluke. Would be nice to hear something about our concerns, even if it's just we did this and that to this skill and this much. /shrug. /em misses the open forums we used to have at eq's main site(before the whole class balancing thing got so huge)

</p>

10-17-2002, 10:06 AM

There's tons of them out there.

It's highly gear dependant and situational apparent.

But I can't solo for XP the way I used to.

I cant solo Rockhoppers or Gorganas without mend

so 1 mob per 6 minutes where before I was doing 3* as many.

Other reports Ive read on the board.

Monk who couldnt do FG anymore for quality XP.

Monk who couldnt take 3 greenies.

Monk who couldnt do KC anymore.

Monk who couldnt do Chardock anymore.

Basically, everyone got moved down a solid peg.

Sure if you were fighting 2 pegs above your Gear you dont notice much.

Tier 1 Monks: Can still Solo ME

Tier 2 Monks: Who who could solo ME can still solo Velks.

Tier 3 Monks: Who could barely solo lower zones can't anymore.

The reason some people were saying that they dont notice the differecne was lots of monks with Tier 2 ability soloing in Tier 3 Places ((HS/Velks))

</p>

10-17-2002, 10:18 AM

I was sitting in SF yesterday with some guildies hoping for a bard epic spawn or somethin on my 49 monk. I of course have always tanked for our pickup groups since we have a very small population of warriors in our guild and even smaller of raid level ones. I ran a 53 cleric OOM with Aego HoS CoP and stat buffs from a sham. Our 50 bard was taking about half the damage I was from the elder Wyv's. It was just rediculous. And what annoys me the most about this whole situation is the dumb ass platers who keep tellin us it was needed. I told a pally in a different group yesterday after he had been arguing with me that monks needed the nerf to go ahead and pull himself then. The moron died 8 times in 11 pulls in KC. They know nothing of what monks do or how to do it... how can they tell us what we need?

</p>

10-17-2002, 10:29 AM

More individual specifics would help. What level are you (60 I assume?) Which Goranga's are we talking about--Just Followers? Where's your ac/hp at? etc

From my personal experience so far:

60 monk

1150ac

2750hp

I can still solo Velks reasonably well, and at least as well if not better than any comparably equipped melee/hybrid.

From the reports I've seen (as I mentioned earlier) I'd guess that accross the board we still solo as well or better than any other comparable melee/hybrid. And that's the thing that's starting to get me. If there is this much uproar and it turns out that we do in-fact still solo better overall--well, then hell yes we were overpowered. If it turns out when everythings been analyzed that your avg monk can no longer solo even the lowest dark blue mobs available, then we have more room to bitch.

Daishan

Grandmaster

Zeb

</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/udaishanozeb.showPublicProfile?language=EN>DaiShan o Zeb</A> at: 10/17/02 6:44:51 am

10-17-2002, 10:41 AM

"pre lvl 13 monks get dual wield.....a warrior can use a 2 hander and outdamage a monk because of a little thing called DAMAGE CAP"

- So?

"next argument.......compare monk weapon skills to war wep skills...pre-50? um, they are the same, with regard to HTH being higher, yet, if any monk uses fists (like they should), they are out of the competition on SUCKING anyway.......what it in fact is, is that warriors slow down in leveling their wep skills at level 40, yet monks continue to get the 5 per lvl all the way on up, with bonus caps removed here and there..."

- So you say monk weapon skills are equal to war weapon skills pre 50 and then go on to say that past level 40 monks keep raising their skills (with dual wield maxed at 252 at level 36).

40 skill raises = big difference. As if you were not contradicting yourself enough already you say that a monk misses less than all melee pre 50 due to this skill level disparity (psst. they also give us raw atk bonus in the offense skill department).

A warrior can't hold a candle to a monk pre 50 damage wise in similar equipment, and post 50 if you see each and every one of the logs posted regularly on this board you will see that on average monks do outdamage warriors by a good margin.

"where the hell do you think monks can even GET actual WEAPONS before lvl 30 anyway? less we wanna use store bought staves (which were fun to run around with in beta looking cool).......im not including luclin, luclin is new and has fucked up EQ beyond repair as we are seeing now anyway, so all the HTH weps dont count (could count in all the war weps up there then too but i dont know luclin well enough). i think its time you try playing monk again using only what you can personally rip off a cold dead corpse.......youll be outdamaged by untwinked warriors your entire life......

monk fists are a joke, but thats what youre gonna rely on......"

If you're not a moron, you will diligently sell spell reagents to higher level players for decent cash and will not be prancing around with a fine steel great staff at level 30. Don't compare damage with not knowing what the fuck to do as a low level character to aquire money and items. Plus, monks are on a higher damage table than the rest of melee pre 50, and post 50. That means that if you equip a warrior with a jade mace at level 30, and a monk with a jade mace at level 30. The monk will hit harder than the warrior with that same weapon.

Monk fists were meant as a pre kunark weapon and widely outdamaged whatever a warrior could muster in the old world as the monk leveled.

Harder hits + less misses = more damage (amazing, no?).

"if a war WANTED to, however, (and this is the case with 99% of players from 1 to 55, until they start getting into end game), he/she could easily equip him/herself to outdamage a monk in 9 out of 10 situations.......

sorry buddy........i think you need to wake up"

Do yourself a favor and take a scoot over the general section and dig up some logs and then try to defend your (wrong) argument with facts instead of ill thought false statements followed by "sorry buddys". Its not gonna make lies become truths.

</p>

10-17-2002, 10:47 AM

i think theres an over all "Theme" forming in the posts ...the closer to 60 and the more UBER your gear is the closer to being what has been regarded as"normal" for the last few years ...and the farther from 60 you are and the more average your gear is ..the nerf seems to have a snowball effect =(

like i said

Prenerf

Monk + normal gear =balanced

Monk + Uber gear + tanking more than VI wanted

Post nerf

Monk + uber gear = balanced( or so they say)

Monk + normal gear = broken ...how could it possibly be balnced if the UBER monks are now?

Personally i think its all a load of crap..if they wanted to be lazy ..they could have added 2 stones to anything thats all/all that drops in a hand full of zones..it would NOT have been thousands of items ...it would not cripple any other classes with ralic packs and the like so common now . and any monks with tons of this uber all/all gear would soon find them selves getting heavy ..loseing AC and getting hit more ...

yes i know 2 stones to all/all isnt a real fix but ...im just throwing an example out there

</p>

10-17-2002, 11:08 AM

----------------------------------------------------

umm dont forget pallies with slay3 against undead mobs seen em hit for 1800 with that....

---------------------------------------------------

A pali in my guild has crit with slay 3 versus undead for over 5k.

I actually think Pali's are natural undead fighters and should have this ability, but I also think monks should be defensive masters. We are magically imbued monks, watch the film 5 deadly venoms sometime. The Toad style guy had invicible steel skin with only one weak spot. That is what an Eq monk should be like, plus he was a great dmg dealer.

Also we fought AOW last night I got triple hit for max dmg, and quad hit 3 of the hits for max dmg and the 4th over 1000, Im not uber but I have full NTOV armor (minus Vulak drops) my buffed Ac was around 1340 and over 5100 hps, FD saved me, but boss mobs are hitting for full and near full for sure.

Sensei Young

Grandmaster

EMarr

</p>

10-17-2002, 11:12 AM

Daishi.

We're pretty comparable.

Level 60. Cof 36% Haste. fungi regen Tstaff

2308 HPS

AC 1140 (1152 epic)

Pre staff of shielding.

I can still solo in Velks. But soloing in Velks was TRIVIAL prepatch. Velks is exactly my point. Velks was BENEATH my solo capabilities prepatch. I never soloed there.

What I can't solo anymore is in Maiden's Eye and DSP.

Gatherers are doing TWICE as much damage as before.

5 to 6 Bulbs of damage after the patch compared with

2 to 3 Bulbs of damage after the patch.

To the UBER monks who ME was trivial Pre-patch. They can still move down to ME for Solo ability.

Again why do I have to suffer a Solo Nerf in ability?

Why can druids/shamanas/necros Root/Rot so easily.

This kind of nerf would be similiar for dotting classes IF Dots no longer worked on a Rooted Mob. You could still do DOTS

in groups where someone else could take agro. But dots no longer worked on rooted mobs.

For the Wizard, Nukes no longer work on Snared Mobs.

In either case, you could still use those offensive abilities with a Tank. And with lesser effect in solo ((no more medding while rotting))

Ubers Monks = No hit. Can still solo same places

Level 2 Monks = Lost Access to "higher" solo places like ME

and down to level 3

Level 3 Monks = SOL. if you had it difficult soloing Velks prepatch, if it was a challenge, then your SOL.

</p>

10-17-2002, 11:15 AM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> Ya'll still bring alot of abilities to a group and a raid, it's just a matter of not being lazy (not all monks were) and making the most out of your character. <hr></blockquote>

Good advice, if only the plate classes would have listened to it, Monks might not have been nerfed this bad. Well, maybe. <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/frown.gif ALT=":(">

<center>
http://chuma.cas.usf.edu/~dking3/Seaghan_Wandering.jpg
</center>

</p>

Jinpo

10-17-2002, 01:21 PM

Chavr:

"Dmg dealer.... who says you have to be the BEST dmg dealer?"

This statement is too stupid to be even touched. I'm afraid it might rub off on me.

" think you meant to say 'rangers with 45 AA points, an uber bow that procs avatar

and a group/guild that understands how to position the mob and themselves to avoid archery doing 0 damage' there."

You know, the same could be said about VI changing the game because of a select 0.5% of the monk population that was able to tank end game mobs in rare situations. You know, the mobs that spawn once a week or 3 times a month?

Where are these people fucking coming from?

<html><body>
<table BORDER COLS=1 WIDTH="250" BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF" ><tr><td>
<p style="margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0"><font size=1>Diciple Jinpo Cai'Feng (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=266967)</font>
<font color="#000099"><font size=1>52nd Echelon Drunken Ashen Monk</font></font>
<font color="#000099"><font size=1>Officer, The Legion of the Bear</font></font>
<font color="#000099"><font size=1>Saryrn</font></font>
<p style="margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0"><font color="#000099" size="2">"Water can flow, or water can crash. Be like the nature of water."</font>

10-17-2002, 01:57 PM

they are the best their classes have to offer.

I know, pretty discouraging.

And to the main poster...

Pleae, Absor, or anyone at VI for that matter, doesn`t give a damn. They are too busy being the best morons they can possibly be to actually be able to read or test their game.

</p>

10-17-2002, 02:03 PM

If monks were the best melee dmg output everytime what would rogues then have? There can only be one class as the best at something. I'm sorry but that is just the way it is. Warriors are the best tanks. Rogues are the best damage dealers. Rangers are the best with a bow. Monks are the best with their fists. Paladins have the ability to be the best against undead. Each class has it's own unique things they are the best at.

You can't be the best at everything. Damage stacks. You can have 3 damage dealers hitting a mob and all are bring something useful to the group. If you have two tanks in a group then you have one tank too many. How many people can a mob hit at any one time? Just one person. Defense doesn't stack like offense does.

Monks still have a very large role to play. They can do alot of damage from any side of a mob. They can pull better then anyone. Yes, sk's can pull but fd can't be interupted.. sk's spell version can. Both have a chance of failing. Monks are also on a seperate dmg table then the plate classes. This means you put out more damage.

The monk role is one of damage dealer. That is what you do. There are alot of ways you can do this role. A secondary role is as puller. As a primary damage dealer you should not be tanking any hits. Your job is to put out damage not absorb it. The disc's you have allow you to live thru the times you might get agro, and FD helps in those times too. The whole point of all your defensive skills is to allow you to live in case your dmg output gives you unwanted agro. The reason you have unwanted agro is because you are doing more damage then most people.

Chavr Wyrmbane ("")

60 Crusader

Druzzil Ro

"New and improved with 10% more healing power, satisfaction garunteed or 90% of your exp back"
</p>

10-17-2002, 02:07 PM

everyones gonna jump on you for that post pally

stone stance may be enought to save us once if fd fails once....Many times i've had to stonestance, mend, and still barely get fd off. Repop time on FD is 8 seconds, if i remember coreectly, stonestance lasts 6 seconds.

if fd failes twice were screwed either way

if monks abliity to take damage is reduced, then 6 seconds of defens disc isnt enough, and you'll never see your pull.

sk's fd can be interrupeted, but they can take a lot more hits than we can

<center>
<img src = "http://www.thealmightyguru.com/Unfiled/Images/Zelda-Title.gif"></img>

Wakha Mohle
Psymileyfaces</center></p>

Fopoodzo

10-17-2002, 02:08 PM

Without a proportional (to defensive decrease - which would still make monks non-tanks) offensive increase, this Nerf is more of a solo/casual player monk nerf than a monk tanking nerf.

With an increase to offence (of a similar proportion to offset the defence nerf) it would still be -ve a change to monks tanking ability without damaging a way that a lot of people play the game.

</p>

10-17-2002, 02:26 PM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> Rogue now tanks better than a monk. Not bloody likely. Please post some extensive numbers that show comparably equipped rogues are now taking less damage than monks. <hr></blockquote>

Please do the same for me with monks and warriors, I have yet to see a parse PROVING this. (People say FoH parsed this, and showed it, but their site has been unreachable for some time).

As far as actual parses showing a warrior and monk in the same level gear? I will be starting a new thread with some numbers posted.

Dainin (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=696)

Human Grandmaster

Servant of Quellious

Shadowed Soul (http://www.shadowedsoul.com)

http://www.shadowedsoul.com/screenshots/Members/Dainin/pull.JPG
</a> </p>

10-17-2002, 02:59 PM

my view is this nerf is un needed. but i wanted to quick word of warning to some guys out there, whilst i understand other classes need to be compared to make points, id suggest we all show restraint in this area. Or all we may achieve is seeing other friends and guild mates being nerfed and suffering the same fate as we are.

im sure on the surface alot of monks think well it would serve them right, but im sure we all have friends of every class that we dont want to see being smacked by the nerf bat

finally my overall view of monks is they sit in the middle, they put out more dmg then wars but less then rogues, they tank better then rogues but worse then wars. whilst this hasnt changed in my opinion. if u looked at it on a slideing scale we where far closer to wars then rogues on the dmg dealing side. on the damage takeing side we have just been moved far closer to rogues, so solution to me would be take an avarage monk in average equipment and likewise rogues and wars and make it so monks fit bang in the middle for dmg taking and giving. to hell with how well uber monks tank, they r not the norm!

</p>

Fopoodzo

10-17-2002, 03:12 PM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> if u looked at it on a slideing scale we where far closer to wars then rogues on the dmg dealing side. on the damage takeing side we have just been moved far closer to rogues, so solution to me would be take an avarage monk in average equipment and likewise rogues and wars and make it so monks fit bang in the middle for dmg taking and giving. to hell with how well uber monks tank, they r not the norm! <hr></blockquote>

Exactly they've moved use down the defensive scale compared to warriors and rogues, it's only balanced to proportionally move us up the offensive scale the same amount.

</p>

Jonnyman

10-17-2002, 03:51 PM

Let me give you my take on the recent change to us monks, my point of view being one from a monk with 110 aa, VT and Ssra equipped and obviously in an end game type guild.

Here are 2 major changes i realized yesterday :

-One, i used to be able to solo mobs in Ssra at the Entrance with an Aego, and i decided i'd give it a shot after this patch. So i went and aggroed one of the Entrance mobs and began meleeing it...about 1 min into the fight, after being hit for numbers i had NEVER seen before, i was at half health. I also noticed my damage avoidance wasnt significantly better either, like many said would be raised to make up for our new ABSOLUTELY CRAPPY damage mitigation table.

-Second, i was pulling Kelun in VT lastnite, i had tagged him, got back into camp and was a second late with FD because i got a huge lag spike, Kelun smoked me, just tore me a new one in like a round and a half, when prior to this patch i most likely would of taken a few partial hits from him, but now, all i got was a bunch of max hits, and there you have one very owned monk. I also ended up on rampage against Kelun later, and the cleric in my group was dumping a sick amount of mana on me, and i had to FD with less than a quarter bub of health numerous times <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/indifferent.gif ALT=":|">

This change is sick, and personally i think they went a little overboard. Oh well, I'll adapt if I have to, just wanted to toss my 2cp on the table

Oh yah, and i got a good laugh reading about the melee classes people thought did the most damage. The best equipped rogue on my server, and someone who knows what he's talking about(he leads the majority of my guilds raids) said himself that in a lot of cases monks outdamage rogues, this being in the high end game of course. Guess what group was getting XP for almost every single trash mob when we clear trash in VT? eh, you guessed it, the monks do, and that was without a bard, when there were 3 rogues and a bard in the "xp" group. True, on boss mobs, the rogue group gets the majority of the xp, but in most situations, monks ARE the top damage dealers.

I know there are other monks who read these boards that agree with that.

<a href=http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=27839>Sensei Jonnyman</a>
, Grandmaster of <a href=http://home.insightbb.com/~nightbane/News.html>NightBane</a>

Karana

</p>

Wubao

10-17-2002, 04:06 PM

Well considering I've levelled a monk up as a main, and a warrior up as a twink alt, I have a pretty good inkling of what both classes can do in crap gear and good gear from levels 1 to 56.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> pre lvl 13 monks get dual wield.....a warrior can use a 2 hander and outdamage a monk because of a little thing called DAMAGE CAP........<hr></blockquote>

Is the warrior using a twinked out 2hander that they couldn't normally afford pre-level 13? OR are they using the RUSTY TWO HANDED SWORD that they could loot?

If it's twinked weapons, then I say again, you're blatantly wrong. A PAIR of Jade Maces at level 10 can outdamage a Nathsar Greatsword by a WIDE margin.

A PAIR of monk NAKED FISTS can outdamage a RUSTY TWO HANDER by hefty margin. Monk fists are damn good weapons in all aspects of the game. At level 60, their ratio is almost as good as one of the the warrior epic swords.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> next argument.......compare monk weapon skills to war wep skills...pre-50? um, they are the same, with regard to HTH being higher, yet, if any monk uses fists (like they should), they are out of the competition on SUCKING anyway<hr></blockquote>

Nope. Monks dual wield skill is SIGNIFICANTLY higher than a warrior's starting out. And pre-50 will cap FAR IN ADVANCE to a warrior. A monk will hard cap dual wield in his mid 40s. HARD CAP. That's 252 dual wield. Since most warriors in their 40s like to dual wield (the 2hander damage bonuses aren't taking effect as much so dual wielding is still a very effective means of doing damage) ... monk damage remains superior. From 13 to 50. Always has, always will. In whatever incarnation of the game you're playing ... pre-kunark, post-kunark, Luclin, post-this-recent-nerf. Whatever.

The ONLY time a warrior outdamages a monk is when the warrior has TWINK weapons and the monk does not.

Also, pre-50, monk hands still have better ratios than a lot of weapons I see NON-TWINKED warriors using.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> .......what it in fact is, is that warriors slow down in leveling their wep skills at level 40, yet monks continue to get the 5 per lvl all the way on up, with bonus caps removed here and there...<hr></blockquote>

This makes a HUGE difference in damage for a monk. Their skills keep going up. Warriors do not.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> what do weapon skills relate to? they relate to MISSES.....so yes, someone who misses less will do more damage......i give you that one.....<hr></blockquote>

It's a VERY IMPORTANT PIECE OF THE PUZZLE though. Skill caps being higher is significant in DPS.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> but then you go on to say that monk weps are equal to or better in ratio/effects then warrior weps available at the same lvl? what are you smoking? super-wu-tang-asian-herb? mr lvl 30 monk with a fighting baton is a twink, buddy<hr></blockquote>

Fighting Batons sell for 100 to 200 plat on my server. Any monk with half a brain can farm pelts starting at level SEVEN and afford a fighting baton.

Essence of Dol. Polished Steel Ulak. Bear Fanged Glove. Fighting Baton. Blackjack. Fireclaw Talons. Cane of the Tranquil (a warrior usable weapon, actually) are all weapons EASILY OBTAINABLE to a monk who goes out and takes the time to MAKE SOME MONEY. All of them tend to be better than the options available to warriors with the SAME LEVEL OF CASH.

If you're going to start pointing out warriors using Lamentations and Centi Longswords, then you have to take into account MONK WEAPONS of the same caliber. Which would be Jade Mace (always superior to Lamentation) and Goranga Spiked Club and Stave of Shielding.

UN-twinked monks have better weapons than UN-twinked warriors.

TWINKED monks have better weapons than TWINKED warriors.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> .......where the hell do you think monks can even GET actual WEAPONS before lvl 30 anyway?<hr></blockquote>

The bazaar.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> im not including luclin, luclin is new and has fucked up EQ beyond repair as we are seeing now anyway, so all the HTH weps dont count (could count in all the war weps up there then too but i dont know luclin well enough).<hr></blockquote>

There's your second biggest mistake then. WELCOME TO LUCLIN. It's almost a year old. You can deny the availability of these weapons all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that they are superior weapons that are available to a LARGE portion of the gaming population.

The mudflation has made things that USED to be amazingly twinked out weapons like a Jade Mace or a Lamentation about as affordable as your next level 40s armor upgrade.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> i think its time you try playing monk again using only what you can personally rip off a cold dead corpse.<hr></blockquote>

My monk is my main. I make an ok amount of loot.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> ......youll be outdamaged by untwinked warriors your entire life......

monk fists are a joke, but thats what youre gonna rely on......<hr></blockquote>

Ah, this is so not true it isn't even funny. My monk is my main. I've outdamaged UNTWINKED WARRIORS since level 1.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> next argument......after 50 monk skill caps take a leap over warriors again, to make up for some of the nonsense theyve had to put up with.....they even get a higher dmg table (which NOBODY knows the effects of)<hr></blockquote>

The effects of the higher damage table are well documented at this web site. There have been copious amounts of parsing made available here over the past year or so. And all of it points to monk damage being very healthy with the new table. And being well beyond the 1 to 1.1 ratio you seem to think monks have over warriors.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> , and they even get upgrades to their fists (which are equivalent, at lvl 50, to that fighting baton i mentioned)<hr></blockquote>

Fighting Baton: 8/20 ... ratio or .4

HUMAN (which is what I am) Monk Fists at level 50: 14/30 ... ratio of .4667

Nope. Monk fists > Fighting Baton

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> monk weapons in the high end game, you say, seem to be superior to dmg output then war weps? well i dunno what CRACK yer smoking now, but how do you calculate damage output of a wep? the only way _I_ know how to do that, realistically, is by calculating its ratio and stat/proc effects.......and in this realistic way to compare weapons damage output, monk weps dont even come close to warrior weps........<hr></blockquote>

Well let's look at the best monk 1 handed weapon in the game right now:

Fangs of Vyzh'dra

LORE ITEM MAGIC ITEM NO DROP

Damage: 17

Delay: 19

Ratio: 1.117 Amazing

AC: +15 Sta: +10 Dex: +10 Wis: +15 Magic Resist: +15 Fire Resist: +15 Cold Resist: +15 HP: +75 Mana: +100

Weight: 0.5

Weapon Skill: Hand to Hand

Classes: Beastlord Monk

Races: All Races

Inventory Slot: Either Melee

Effect: Claw of Khati Sha

Type: Random

Please, show me better WARRIOR weapons than this.

The best available warrior 1hand weapon would be Bloodfrenzy or Acrylia Handled Bastard Sword or Hategiver. All three HAVE INFERIOR RATIOS to the fangs.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> the best droppable monk weps in the game right now will get you looking at the 2 lifeproc weps <hr></blockquote>

Are we talking DROPPABLE monk weapons?

The best droppable monk weapon in the game is either Kahsek's Katar or Tranquil Staff.

The best DROPPABLE warrior weapon in the game is the Blade of Carnage.

BUT, by the time you can get BLADE OF CARNAGE, odds are your monks are sporting some NO-DROP weapons better than BoC.

Either your TWINKING out your warrior and NOT twinking out your monk, which would explain the disparity in DPS ... or you're just not thinking straight.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> next argument......monks have flying kick......yup, you win this one...not even gonna touch it.......except to say that when a warrior stuns an opponent, with slam lets say, the opponent CANNOT USE DEFENSIVE SKILLS<hr></blockquote>

What in the world are you talking about? Flying kick OUTDAMAGES anything a warrior has. Plain and simple. More damage. You said warriors have almost as much damage as monks. Flying kick is one of the variables in the DPS equation. Monks do more damage.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> ......such as dodge block etc (the war can still miss of course)......this works on NPCs, dunno if it works in duels, used to all across the board (as dueling was considered targetting an NPC, but PvP servers needed that to be changed or every wizard/necro would just own joo).....however, i still agree that monks over time do more damage with FK then a warrior can even hope to do with slam or kick (even though war will do considerably more dmg after a successful slam)<hr></blockquote>

Do you perchance play on a red server? Warriors do NOT do more damage after a successful slam. Warriors continue to pump out the SAME DPS whether the mob is slammed or NOT. The mobs AC doesn't change. The warrior's weapons do NOT change their damage.

Monks outdamage warriors.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> one thing you neglect is that wars all throughout the game will have more str then a monk.....good wars will also have more dex......<hr></blockquote>

Nope. Not all throughout the game. Monks hit 255 str just as easily as warriors do. And even WITH the higher str, monks still have higher ATK ratings for all of their careers. Meaning they hit more.

STR parses have shown the increase in damage to be minimal.

Dex doesn't affect anything in combat other than procs. Monks ALSO, traditionally have VERY high dexterity as much of the gear they wear has it, and they start out with higher dex than a warrior class base (unless you're a wood elf warrior or a halfling?).

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> good wars will also do lots of crits.......this added up gives them an equalizer in the fact that monks will have higher skill caps........<hr></blockquote>

Please, show me the data where warriors with crits are outdamaging monks. This I gotta see.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> in the END END END game, both monk and war have maxed str and dex, so a monk outdamaegs a war.....especially one that followed your example in sacrificing DPS to enable him to hold aggro etc.....<hr></blockquote>

In the end, end game, monks ALSO have crits.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> if a war WANTED to, however, (and this is the case with 99% of players from 1 to 55, until they start getting into end game), he/she could easily equip him/herself to outdamage a monk in 9 out of 10 situations.......<hr></blockquote>

A warrior needs to twink themselves with some very good, and expensive weapons to outdamage a monk.

If a MONK goes and returns the favor by twinking themselves, they'll AGAIN outdamage the warrior.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> sorry buddy........i think you need to wake up<hr></blockquote>

I'm just stunned by your ignorance of the game right now. I think I need to take a nap.

-Wu

</p>

Pokiri

10-17-2002, 04:06 PM

Chavr,

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>

If monks were the best melee dmg output everytime what would rogues then have? There can only be one class as the best at something. I'm sorry but that is just the way it is. Warriors are the best tanks. Rogues are the best damage dealers. Rangers are the best with a bow. Monks are the best with their fists. Paladins have the ability to be the best against undead. Each class has it's own unique things they are the best at.

<hr></blockquote>

Er, do you even realize how pathetic fists are? With epic, it's 9/16 for each fist. There's Kunark-era weapons that are better than that. Not to mention, monks aren't asking for the best melee damage output either.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>

You can't be the best at everything. Damage stacks. You can have 3 damage dealers hitting a mob and all are bring something useful to the group. If you have two tanks in a group then you have one tank too many. How many people can a mob hit at any one time? Just one person. Defense doesn't stack like offense does.

<hr></blockquote>

Quite correct. But what advantage does a monk have over a rogue in a group? Or a warrior for that matter? Just think about the pre-NToV monk, which is what this patch has hit hardest: 1100AC, 2500hp, wielding a 29/30 Kunark-era weapon, tanks like Kleenex. Think about the pre-NToV warrior: 1200AC, 3500hp, wielding a 44/44 Luclin-era weapon, tanks like a tank. Where's the comparison?

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>

Monks still have a very large role to play. They can do alot of damage from any side of a mob. They can pull better then anyone. Yes, sk's can pull but fd can't be interupted.. sk's spell version can. Both have a chance of failing. Monks are also on a seperate dmg table then the plate classes. This means you put out more damage.

<hr></blockquote>

Keep in mind, pulling has nothing to do with damage. Monks are on a separate "damage table" than the plate classes in terms of taking damage as well. So the SK will survive to pull two mobs back to camp, and the monk won't make it back. Where's the monk role? Again, keep in mind, we are not talking about monks with 1300+ AC and 3000+ HP. We're talking about the pre-NToV monk.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>

The monk role is one of damage dealer. That is what you do. There are alot of ways you can do this role. A secondary role is as puller. As a primary damage dealer you should not be tanking any hits. Your job is to put out damage not absorb it. The disc's you have allow you to live thru the times you might get agro, and FD helps in those times too. The whole point of all your defensive skills is to allow you to live in case your dmg output gives you unwanted agro. The reason you have unwanted agro is because you are doing more damage then most people.

<hr></blockquote>

Pre-NToV monks don't get unwanted aggro. Hell they don't get wanted aggro, even. Until recently, both myself and the other 55+ monk in my guild were using tranquil staves on raids and not getting any aggro. Point is, pre-NToV there just isn't that much monk damage. You're talking about a 29/30 two-hander, or 9/16 + 13/21 one-handers, in most cases, or something pretty darn close. Pre-NToV Luclin-era warriors have 13/20 and 12/20 weapons, and 44/44 two-handers.

The reason we need mitigation ability is to pull. Frankly, if Verant just tossed out our mitigation and gave us 90% of rogue damage I'd see a point to being a monk. However, that's not what they did. They tossed out the mitigation of the pre-NToV monk while leaving the damage unchanged. The difference between 9/16+13/21 and 15/20+14/18 is HUGE, and the difference between 1100AC and 1300+ AC is HUGE now, bigger than the difference for any other class. Basically, the role of pre-NToV monks is very unclear, and Vex Thal monks can still do a heck of a lot but it's unclear what they're supposed to do. Monks aren't hybrids, their role should be crystal-clear.

So coming back to the point of this thread: what is the role of a monk?

</p>

10-17-2002, 05:55 PM

The rogue in the group can't pull like a monk, and then once the mob gets back the monk can slap on dps. The warrior in the group has the same problem as the rogue... no pulling ability and the warrior won't even touch the monk for dps. Sk's can pull, but they can't do monk dps.

How hard is it to see? Monks still have a well defined role as damage dealer and puller. Before the change was made ya'll also had a overpowered defense in comparison to your offense skills.

Heck, the way ya'll are talking about defence and the need to be a tank you should have had your dps yanked down instead of your defence. Maybe you would feel better then.

I'm truly sorry you feel that because you can't be a tank anymore your class is broken. Seems to me monks are still dishing out as much damage as before and their role has always been damage dealer. Oh well, I'm done with this. The few monks that are trying to bring hard info are being drowned out the people that only see things the way they want to see them.

Chavr Wyrmbane ("")

60 Crusader

Druzzil Ro

"New and improved with 10% more healing power, satisfaction garunteed or 90% of your exp back"
</p>

Pokiri

10-17-2002, 06:07 PM

Fopoodzo

10-17-2002, 06:19 PM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> How hard is it to see? Monks still have a well defined role as damage dealer and puller. Before the change was made ya'll also had a overpowered defense in comparison to your offense skills. <hr></blockquote>

Actually if you look at it warriors are just under monks in meless damage (far closer to monks than monks are to rogues).

Bizarrely monks are now far closer to rogues in tanking than to warriors.

So monks now get shafted at both ends, offence and defence.

Even rangers in tanking and pure melee damage are now raised up to the level of monks, and they have spells and bow damage on top.

Now I don't think any class should be nerfed, but I DO think monk melee damage should be raises slightly in light of the defence nerf to bring it back into line with warriors and rogues.

</p>

10-17-2002, 06:24 PM

Either raise Offense a bit or roll back the nerfage part of the patch.

Something needs to be done regardless in my opinion.

Jaxe

55 Blackguard

Taylr

46 Monk

</p>

10-17-2002, 06:53 PM

We now have the same shout at damage dealing that Rogues do. We used to fall between Warriors and Rogues for tanking and damage and that was the status quo for 99% of the games content.... if you're going to change our role actually change it, don't just nerf it.

<hr />
<div>
Xarnak "Death to all fanatics" Clawfist (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=266873), Iksar Monk of Xev.
</div>
<div>
Dubious member of Hawkestone (http://pub72.ezboard.com/bhawkestone).
</div>

<div>

"I stare, it stares back.

I long to know its feelings.

It demurs. Lunch, then."

</div></p>

10-17-2002, 07:38 PM

Not to beat the horse to death, but the decrease in mitigation for most of us will make the implied role of puller nearly impossible. I don't know of any pulls (without SOW) that I didn't get hit on. Now with those hits being max damage a larger percentage of time, that means I am going to have to blow mend. Not a big deal except that 20% heal once used cant be used again for another 6 mins.

Now I am looking at continuing the pull without my self heal available. No biggie, I can use Stonestance. Damage reduced to 1/3 for about 12 secs. Now that is gone for the next 6 mins. And I am only halfway back to the safe little camping spot the guild has chosen for the ambush.

No biggie, I can FD if it looks bad. Yep need to FD. Tiket has fallen to the ground. Quick need to stand back up, Loading Please Wait..... And this scenario doesn't even take into account the number of times you can get stunned from being hit from behind which increases the severity of the max hit.

Sorry for this little vent.

I see a need to get RS3 asap. I have RS1 but followed the level>aa approach. Need to rethink that. Even then with some of the crappy mob pathing I have seen, not sure that will help reduce adds or save my behind on a pull. I hope someone out there can definitely tell me what my role is since pulling doesn't look as possible. Probably will need to look at balancing my recent drop in AC to get more HP as well. I love playing my monk and hope that there will be some light at the end of the tunnel.

Tiket Kouryuu
56th Master
Vazaelle

<A HREF=http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=89181>Tiket's Stuff</A></p>

10-17-2002, 08:25 PM

Best monk weapons :

17/19 hp100 DD150 (fire lure)

17/20 hp100 DD150 (fire lure)

44/30 hp125 DD100 (lifetap lure)

Best war weapons :

16/19 hp100 DD100 (lifetap lure)

21/24 hp100 DD75 (lifetap low resist)

53/40 hp125 (Rune 230hp)

54/42 hp125 DD100 (Lifetap lure)

Monk weapons are better nuffsaid (not by much i agree)

So even without the different DMG table & ATK values & Epic

A monk with the same weapons will do more dmg than any war.

So if u think war > monk in DPS better get ur head out of ur arse.

If the monk does less its 1) lower lvl weapon 2) unbuffed monk

</p>

10-17-2002, 08:29 PM

Hmmm, I am not sure if monk dps>warrior dps anymore in high end encounters. Monks will not spend the majority of there time on the ground FD because they don't want to get agro and die within a very short period of time or get on the ramps list because there is no way to get off ramp list and it sees through FD.

Khrent Furyfistt 54th Iksar Monk (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=2751) Reviviscence Guild, Quellious (http://reviviscence.dynu.com/reviv/index.html)

</p>

10-17-2002, 08:47 PM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>

Monk weapons are better nuffsaid (not by much i agree)

So even without the different DMG table & ATK values & Epic

A monk with the same weapons will do more dmg than any war.

<hr></blockquote>

Which Monk? And which Warrior?... Simply plucking the stats for the highest weapons off the shelf doesn't reflect the actuality for most players.

At 57th, I'm a pretty average player, using the IFS (38/40) I have since 52nd, and saving up for a T-Staff (well was until this nerf)... If I shell out on a T-Staff (50k+ on Xev, if you can find one), a Warrior can compete with that in the bazaar.

If I were to continue playing my Monk, it would be quite some considerable time until my guild can raid in places were I can make the jump ahead of Warriors again in weapons.

I'm not arguing that Monks don't do more damage than Warriors, what some here are trying to illustrate is the gap is narrowing. Ordinarily this wouldn't be that big an issue, but in light of recent events many Monks aren't willing to shrug off circumstance they normally would have ignored.

<hr />
<div>
Xarnak "Death to all fanatics" Clawfist (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=266873), Iksar Monk of Xev.
</div>
<div>
Dubious member of Hawkestone (http://pub72.ezboard.com/bhawkestone).
</div>

<div>

"I stare, it stares back.

I long to know its feelings.

It demurs. Lunch, then."

</div></p>

Pokiri

10-17-2002, 08:56 PM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>

Best monk weapons :

17/19 hp100 DD150 (fire lure)

17/20 hp100 DD150 (fire lure)

44/30 hp125 DD100 (lifetap lure)

Best war weapons :

16/19 hp100 DD100 (lifetap lure)

21/24 hp100 DD75 (lifetap low resist)

53/40 hp125 (Rune 230hp)

54/42 hp125 DD100 (Lifetap lure)

<hr></blockquote>

Number of those weapons my guild can get: 0

The real problem is at the pre-NToV level of play, where warriors tank much better than monks and rogues hugely outdamage both.

Think:

monk=1100ac, 2500hp, 31% haste

warrior=1200ac, 3500hp, 27% haste

rogue=(er, I dunno), 40% haste

That's the situation where there's a problem post-nerf. Not for the people in Vex Thal.

</p>

10-17-2002, 09:10 PM

.. melee classes really don't approach monk DPS until primal or better are in the hands of those classes. Primal (or better) is a giant upgrade for non-monks. It's a relatively small upgrade for monks. The net effect is that the gap closes significantly for DPS in the high end game. Rogue BS scales geometically, so they maintain their DPS lead with just a small change in weapon maximum damage.

The issue with DPS and that we "should" be closer to rogues is mostly due to the lack of nice monk weapons. By nice, I mean relatively nicer than what other classes get for the same effort. Ours are nicer, they're only a tiny bit nicer, though. This is why all the other classes are crowding monks at the high end and non-pulling monks would have been better off had they chosen to play rogues.

</p>

10-17-2002, 09:19 PM

the patch certainly makes gear choices more difficult...

instead of mindlessly pursuing max hp/sta > ac/agi...now maybe we'll have to balance it better.

i might go more ac a bit to get up to 1300 and add more agi too without sacrificing too much hp/sta.

/shrug

i still pull ok, i still do damage ok, and i still enjoy my monk.

soloing is harder, but oh well.

in a raid/complex pulling situation, experience and play skill make up the difference when the margin of error is decreased (ie. less mitigation, fewer hp).

yup, the patch makes the monk harder to play. decreases some of our versatility. decreases some of the breadth of our abilities. i still wouldn't play any other class. say goodbye to the million monk twinks though...

---

oh, and to clear up some errors i saw in some prior posts:

1. monk FD can be interrupted... ie. casters/ae.

2. more than 1 person can in fact take damage from a mob (tank)... ie. /SHIELD (grats wars on sweet new ability!)

my 2cp

- <a href=http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=27496>Chungkuo Sifu</a>

*Epic* Human Monk

Grandmaster of the 60th Chamber
Order of the Celestial Fists
<a href=http://pub82.ezboard.com/bguardiansofthekeep>
Guardians of the Keep</a>, Drinal
</p>

Pokiri

10-17-2002, 09:27 PM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>

Warriors and other non-monk .. .. melee classes really don't approach monk DPS until primal or better are in the hands of those classes. Primal (or better) is a giant upgrade for non-monks. It's a relatively small upgrade for monks. The net effect is that the gap closes significantly for DPS in the high end game. Rogue BS scales geometically, so they maintain their DPS lead with just a small change in weapon maximum damage.

<hr></blockquote>

Actually the DPS gap closed a lot in the last two expansions, if you consider the pre-NToV monk. The average monk still uses a Kunark-era weapon, either IFS (38/40) or tstaff (29/30+120dd). The average warrior uses Dismay (44/44) or better, which is a Luclin-era weapon. I can say from personal experience, over many parsed fights, that a shaman-hasted warrior (my spouse) with ornate sword of the general/bone handled scimitar with RBG will do approximately 85% of the damage as a shaman-hasted monk with IFS/SSHS. However, my spouse had ~1200ac/3500hp, and I had ~1100ac/2500hp - a very big difference.

Aside:

Primal seems like a giant upgrade to me, actually: I'd personally go from a 12/20+75hp lifetap weapon to 15/20. But until I get a key and get in there, it may as well be 17/19 because I'm not gonna see either.

</p>

10-17-2002, 09:49 PM

With EQUIVALENT weapons a monk will outdamage a warrior.

The only exeptions might be some monstrous weapons from CT (like that 44/44 axe).

Monk have :

Better damage table (from lvl1)

More ATK (from lvl 1)

More Haste (epic from lvl50)

When you can enter ToV (Telko/Gozz) a monk will just own a warrior.

(Go look at Shovel of the Harvest).

Before ToV i think monks still do better.

(Epic + 38/40 will beat 44/44 )

Before Epic ? Well .... who knows

This patch was designed to nerf uber monks.

Well it didnt affect them much <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/frown.gif ALT=":(">

But it affected non uber and that is a shame.

</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/uemiliaeq.showPublicProfile?language=EN>EmiliaEQ</A> at: 10/17/02 5:55:04 pm

10-17-2002, 10:21 PM

Well of course it did, we EXPLAINED to them, we SLOWLY TOLD them it would do jackshit to the uber monks while raping the average monk. Did they listen?

Oh nooooooooooooo, don't listen to the people who actually KNOWS anything about monks, just keep making stupid changes VI, you retards.

</p>

10-18-2002, 05:38 AM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>

When you can enter ToV (Telko/Gozz) a monk will just own a warrior.

(Go look at Shovel of the Harvest).

<hr></blockquote>

The shovel of the harvest which is, err, All/All (ironically meaning a Warrior gets access to a weapon as good as a monk and breaking down the gap - see how it works *both* ways).

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>

Before ToV i think monks still do better.

(Epic + 38/40 will beat 44/44 )

<hr></blockquote>

Hardly given teh current itemisation.

If you are not in an uberguild it is virtually impossible for a monk to improve their damage over their epic fists 9/16. This caps the monk at that level. Meanwhile the much more smoothly itemised slash/pierce curve has continued to allow Warriors (and other classes) to improve their weaponry.

Plenty of monks in reasonably capable guilds who are not uber are still using epic fists or a similar equivalent. Sadly there is nothing in Luclin obtainable by non-ubers. All the 58+ warriors in my guild have better weaponry than my monk in fact better than any of the monks other than one with a Shovel of Harvest.

</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/utheunmistakablevoiceofreason.showPublicProfile?la nguage=EN>The Unmistakable Voice of Reason</A> at: 10/18/02 1:58:21 am

10-18-2002, 05:45 AM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>

Monk weapons are better nuffsaid (not by much i agree)

So even without the different DMG table & ATK values & Epic

A monk with the same weapons will do more dmg than any war.

<hr></blockquote>

No, it is not even close.

If a Warrior is not being used to tank (a CHOICE) then he can hit offensive and for 3 minutes out of every 10 he does 40% more damage. This is significantly better than that which a monk can do. Warriors who aren't tanking do more damage.

Meanwhile a post nerf monk is not a viable tank any more (not a choice). Yet they are outdamaged by non-tanking Warriors. And in many situations greatly outdamaged as the warrior has better weapons due to a smoother upgrade path and much more attainable weapons.

</p>

Keyeluke

10-18-2002, 07:28 AM

"If you are not in an uberguild it is virtually impossible for a monk to improve their damage over their epic fists 9/16. This caps the monk at that level. Meanwhile the much more smoothly itemised slash/pierce curve has continued to allow Warriors (and other classes) to improve their weaponry."

IFS > epic fists

T-Staff > epic fists

Amygdalan War Staff > epic fists

I own or have owned all three of these weapons in my career, and none of them was obtained with any guild help whatsoever (save my pennies, hunt loot zones, work the bazaar, buy the toys).

Keyeluke

Number One Son

My Magelo (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=27415)</p>

10-18-2002, 08:55 AM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> our best wep in the game is something like 1.4 ratio, and by then any knight has or is nearing a 0.7 ratio, on a bloody 1 hander no less.......i dont dare mention their 2 handers.......<hr></blockquote>

Hello misinformation.

Monks have weapons with ratios superior to 1.0 since freaking Kunark (Bo Staff of Trorsmang anyone? 42/35). Yes Kunark, back when 34/40 for a 2hander was some super hot stuff.

Currently the best weapon in game (short of the Akhevan bane weapons) would be Caen's Bo Staff of Fury, a monk weapon, 43/30 with some elemental damage added in.

Best Knight weapons (ratio wise) would be BBB (which is war/pal/sk/rng usable) with a ratio of 52/40 or 1.300

Caen's is 1.433

The Sword of Ssraeshza (also war/pal/sk/rng usable) which drops from the same mob dropping Caen's is 52/42, a ratio of 1,238.

Best ratio a knight can get on a 1hander is with the Frostwrath, 24/22. You probably forgot the fact that Knights dont dual weild, so while a knight will use this, a monk can dual weild things like 17/19-17/20. If you honestly think that a single 24/22 outdamage a 17/19-17/20 setup, you're smoking some hardcore stuff.

<CENTER>http://pages.infinit.net/kerosene/sigfinal.JPG</CENTER>
<CENTER>magelo (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=1116) E/V (http://www.evguild.org/)</CENTER></p>

10-18-2002, 09:43 AM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>

IFS > epic fists

T-Staff > epic fists

Amygdalan War Staff > epic fists

I own or have owned all three of these weapons in my career, and none of them was obtained with any guild help whatsoever (save my pennies, hunt loot zones, work the bazaar, buy the toys).

<hr></blockquote>

I have also used all three of those. Outside of specific applications, they are all virtually identical in their damage output. Same with the Claw of the Savage Lord weapons in Luclin (Rhag 1 and THO) which are basically the same damage but give you some states (whoop de doo) while the Warrior is using Luclin weapons which offer stats, AC and more damage. And really, THO is out of reach for most non-uber guilds (yes I know a few can and do kill it but that is not the norm).

Monks just aren't doing more damage today than they did in teh Kunark Era because for most of them there simply aren't achievable weapon upgrades.

Again, it's ok for ubers - the game appears entirely balanced off what these few unfortunate wretches can do.

</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/utheunmistakablevoiceofreason.showPublicProfile?la nguage=EN>The Unmistakable Voice of Reason</A> at: 10/18/02 5:45:48 am

10-18-2002, 10:29 AM

Has the focus now shifted to our dps? I ask this because now that our defense is nerfed, it seems we are getting complaints that we deal too much damage. Will that be next? Should the warriors now get upgrades to not only tank better (which isn't about dps) but to also be the top dps non-situational? Maybe I am misreading this but sounds like several arguments are leaning this way. I sure hope not. It is bad enough as it is, any further nerfage and the class is truly dead. Many of the mages I know are feeling SOL with the rod nerf and we run the risk of joining them.

Tiket Kouryuu
56th Master
Vazaelle

<A HREF=http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=89181>Tiket's Stuff</A></p>

10-18-2002, 12:00 PM

to Chavr....

shut the hell up

k thx

</p>

Fopoodzo

10-18-2002, 12:19 PM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> Has the focus now shifted to our dps? I ask this because now that our defense is nerfed, it seems we are getting complaints that we deal too much damage. Will that be next? Should the warriors now get upgrades to not only tank better (which isn't about dps) but to also be the top dps non-situational? Maybe I am misreading this but sounds like several arguments are leaning this way. I sure hope not. It is bad enough as it is, any further nerfage and the class is truly dead. Many of the mages I know are feeling SOL with the rod nerf and we run the risk of joining them. <hr></blockquote>

No, if anything it'd be warrior damage that would be nerfed (unless VI just decides they want to delete the monk class <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/smile.gif ALT=":)"> ).

But warrior damage shouldn't be nerfed, but rather monk damage (post-defensive nerf) needs to be proportionally increased to put us back in balance between warriors and rogues defensively and offensively.

Then cannot nerf defence without increasing offence, unless they want to make monks seriously under-balanced compared to warriors and rogues (and several hybrids).

</p>

10-18-2002, 01:13 PM

Just wanted to add a quick note on warriors and rogues "having no pull ability". I played a warrior and monk from December 99 all the way up until after luclin. Most of my time went to my warrior because that was what my guild needed. With that said, there are a few things you can do to make yourself a good puller, no matter your class. Yes monks and sk's have an advantage with FD in case they get in trouble, but I pulled extremely well with my warrior and his bow. There are some tricks maybe you should learn before you comment on that issue.

Rizzenn Kenafin
60th Warlord

</p>

10-18-2002, 02:14 PM

With a Monk as main, since Kunark. and nearing 90 played days on monk alone, I do find that this latest nerf is crippling me beyond that which I can offset with items. Being an averagely equipped monk...AC 1000-1050...HP 2k or so...unbuffed. Things have changed in a negative way.

I find it unfortunate that they would make changes that affect an entie class, because of a small group of monks...those THAT are Vex capable and have the best of the best equipment. This change isn't affecting them as much as it is the normal player.

So Because the very, very best of the class were perhaps abit too strong, they have changed it so that ALL monks are crippled to an extent.

This can be said for any class...if you compare the Best Warrior, Rogue, Pally in the game to normal characters of the same class it's like comparing apples and oranges...at that level of the game it is normal for some of the lines between classes to grey out. These are not the norm...I do know many of these (Vex Thal-NToV equipped) monks and I might as well be a different class to them even at 53. Most of their equipment, I will NEVER see on myself.

Glad I have a 52 Necro to play, looks like it's time to hang up the favorite, and go with something abit more practical. Monks are now officially bad tradeskillers.

I can't pull...take too much damage to pull if cleric has to CH me after every pull. if I survive.

I can't solo good Xp...take too much damage for the amount of XP I could get.

I can't tank...take too much damage.

I understand that Verant did not think of pulling mobs, when they concieved the idea...so...they didn't think of Druids snare quading, or necros fear kiting either...and it is the way we have used our skills and abilities to the max...if they ake changes afterwards to take it back, thats fine...but your going to have to change something else to compensate, otherwise your nerfing, nerfing, nerfing...and the class becomes weaker and weaker...especially when these nerfs are affecting abilities and skills innate to the class and not somehting obtained through play.

Vented....much better now.

53 Monk Preparing for retirement

• Indicus Velox •

51 SwiftTail

•Inferi Dominatus •

51 Heretic

------------------------

•Dark Moon Rising•

•Saryrn•
</p>

10-18-2002, 03:36 PM

Bleh, don't sell monks short. The nerf sucked and came about in it's current form due to sheer lazyness on VI's part to nerf at most hundred or so items instead of an entire class (easy way out as opposed to the RIGHT way out)... BUT:

SK's are still by far much less effective FD pullers than monks, even if the SK has with both SK spell forms of FD AND Blood Ember greaves. Stone stance may have a shorter duration then the refresh time of monk FD, but both forms of SK FD can fizzle, the first is a 1.5 second cast with a 15 second refresh time. Death Peace at level 60 is a 1 second cast tiem with a 4 second refresh. Trying to channel FD through raid level mobs for 1 second or 1.5 second is not trivial... Don't get me wrong, SK fd is a fine tool, but monk FD is vastly better as a skill by itself, but especially when conjoined with skillfull use of stone stance. SK's AC/HPS/Damage Mitigation isn't so great that 4 to 15 seconds of a beat down is any more survivable for them then 2 seconds of beatdown is for a Monk.

Monks have the best non-situational sustained damage. It may not be great amounts higher than warriors at the high end of gear, but I really have no experience at that level to say. Rogues can have high levels of sustained damage if they can get back (and on a raid what half brained guild can't do that?), but then that means they can't tank. Rangers can put out tremendous damage if they are presented with the correct situation also, but Rangers can't sustain that dps as once their disc ends and they need to wait for refresh.

Personally, instead of asking what the monk role should be of VI, Monks should be out there either establishing their role further if they don't like being a FD puller/damage dealer or discussing what Monks want their role to by without ranting or putting foward what seems to be just class one-upmanship.

Khuzdul (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=257207)

Ologhai (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=257219)
</p>

10-18-2002, 03:44 PM

Indicus

You sum up my feelings about this whole thing pretty well. I am thinking already of changing how I play this character in order to merely survive. Such as, you don't SoW me, I don't pull. Even if you do SoW me, depending on the zone, I still won't pull. If I do pull, I'm going to FD as soon as I am back at the group and wait until whoever our tank may be engages mob for a while. Only then will I get up and do my damage. Otherwise I have to be healed a LOT because I take a LOT more damage now. Trouble is, this patch not only is forcing us to avoid aggro like the plague, it also nerfed our soloing ability. I chose this character because if you are careful you can solo decently. Now I can't even solo at all.

Scalylarry

52 Monk of E'Ci

</p>

Fopoodzo

10-19-2002, 01:05 PM

Yep this patch was a tanking nerf, but it's largest effect was to be primarily a soloing nerf. <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/frown.gif ALT=":(">

</p>

10-19-2002, 10:00 PM

Role? Other than pulling?

I see the pure melee ratings about this way, in relation to each other,on a scale of 1-10:

CLASS / DAMAGE / DEFENSE

--------------------------------------

Rogue / 10 / 6 total melee strength 16

Warrior / 6 / 10 total melee strength 16

Ranger / 6 / 6 total melee strength 12

Paladin / 5 / 9 total melee strength 14

Shadowknight / 5 / 9 total melee strength 14

Monk / 7 / 4 total melee strength 11

Beastlord / 5 / 7 total melee strength 12

Bard / 4 / 7 total melee strength 11

Now when you factor in that all hybrids have another 4-5 points worth of spells to strengthen their combat capabilities, (and admittedly, monks and rogues have about a point each of special abilities too), monks end up at the extreme short end of the total balance stick. Prior to the nerf, you could leave this whole chart the same, except give monks about an 8 in defense. Still underbalanced compared to warriors/rogues, but hey, we had an important alternate role that made up for it.

Not sure it does anymore.

Sensei Deirdre Sadiqa (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=192025)

Grandmistress of Tranquility

Warlords of Wrath
Crouching Tigress Training Dragons
</p>

10-21-2002, 02:51 PM

So the premise here is that monks outdamage monks even pre-NTOV because of better gear or epic fists, yet a poster points out three weapons with better DPS than epic fists:

IFS > epic fists

T-Staff > epic fists

Amygdalan War Staff > epic fists

Note that the last two (which are the better DPS weapons) are WARRIOR USABLE. In fact, my entire suit of gear is warrior usable, so I fail to see how I can outtank a similarly equipped warrior when they'd have 2000 more hp than I, regardless of the nerf. With my weapon and equivalent 50's level, I would do slightly more damage with the same weapon due to FK and damage table, but the warrior's disc would put them WAY ahead of me over time.

Sorry, but this nerf is NOT well planned. It harms the wrong players and characters without solving ANY balance issues. Arguing that monks outdamage warriors is factually incorrect, given equal gear. Given equal spending, it is also untrue. In NTOV or later gear, monks pull ahead slightly and also catch up in hp and ac. This is what was supposed to be addressed. Instead, the non-uber monk gain a massive increase to anal diameter and the uber are unaffected.

</p>

Fopoodzo

10-21-2002, 03:10 PM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> Sorry, but this nerf is NOT well planned. It harms the wrong players and characters without solving ANY balance issues. Arguing that monks outdamage warriors is factually incorrect, given equal gear. Given equal spending, it is also untrue. In NTOV or later gear, monks pull ahead slightly and also catch up in hp and ac. This is what was supposed to be addressed. Instead, the non-uber monk gain a massive increase to anal diameter and the uber are unaffected. <hr></blockquote>

Yup. <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/frown.gif ALT=":(">

</p>

10-21-2002, 03:17 PM

My personal opinion on the table a few posts up would be:

Post patch--Monks would probably be around an 8/7 or so. Maybe 8/6 if poorly equipped for their level.

Again...Just my opinion (as was the original table).

Daishan

Grandmaster

Zeb

</p>

Wubao

10-21-2002, 04:40 PM

"Note that the last two (which are the better DPS weapons) are WARRIOR USABLE. "

Tranquil Staff, last time I checked, was NOT warrior usable.

Neither was Imbued Fighters Staff.

Tae Ew War Maul and Amygdalan War Staff certainly are.

But Reaver and Stonebladed Axe of Dismay are both more common warrior usable 2hand slashers with better ratios than the Tae Ew War Maul.

Anyways, PRE-55 it takes some serious twinking for a warrior to outdamage a monk without serious twinking.

PRE-50, the two hand damage bonus isn't that high, so you really need to think about whether or not your 2hand setup is outdamaging your dual wield setup.

POST-EPIC monks have the clicky haste and the atk boost.

Where did all this jibba jabba about warriors outdamaging monks come from?

For two years it's been nothing on these boards but Rogue>Monk>Warrior, Rogue>Monk>Warrior, yadda yadda yadda.

Now, we get a defensive mitigation tweak, and suddenly everyone's trying to get monk offensive damage raised by "lying" or "stretching the truth" and saying warriors are too close to us in damage ... or outright saying warriors OUTDAMAGE us?

I find this whole movement rather suspect.

-Wu

</p>

Pokiri

10-21-2002, 05:18 PM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>

Now, we get a defensive mitigation tweak, and suddenly everyone's trying to get monk offensive damage raised by "lying" or "stretching the truth" and saying warriors are too close to us in damage ... or outright saying warriors OUTDAMAGE us?

<hr></blockquote>

Actually, it's like this: most of us assumed that we were "balanced", given the defensive and offensive capabilities we had at the time. In the case of the average level 60 monk, slightly more offense, slightly less defense, than a similarly equipped warrior.

Now, it's become apparent that VI considered us defensively overpowered, and nerfed us hard. But that alters our own perception of how "balanced" we are... because given pre-nerf defense, only slightly outdamaging warriors was acceptable. If we're supposed to assume an actual damage dealing role and not a pulling role, as the nerf suggests, we need to do a LOT more damage to be useful in a group.

I personally assumed that near-warrior damage didn't matter that much because for 90% of raids, and 90% of the time, I'm lying FD. If I'm actually supposed to do damage, I don't feel I'm capable of doing it enough to justify the offensive role that VI seems to have cast us in.

I don't think anyone's really saying warriors outdamage us, but they get surprisingly close at various points in a monk's life, and given that our current defensive capabilities are closer to rogues than warriors, I personally feel that we should have offensive capabilities closer to rogues than warriors. In my personal experience, that's just not there.

Admittedly, this is something that can be fixed by itemization - I still hold some hope of that, considering mid-60 warriors have gotten a lot of weapons in the Luclin era (dismay 44/44, tae ew war maul 33/36, amy war staff 37/36, scythe of sundering 13/20, fleshgrinder 12/19, lurid dagger 12/20, skybreaker 13/19) and mid-60 monks have gotten such ass weapons (fist of iron 11/20, GIU 16/28, khashek's 12/20, skybreaker 13/19) that most of us are still using freakin' Kunark era weapons. The damage tables are the ONLY thing keeping warriors from outdamaging us.

It's embarassing. There's a level 55-ish casual player warrior in my guild that has a scythe of sundering (13/20) and lurid dagger (12/20), and my mainhand is a freakin' 12/20 weapon (or 13/21 for FR mobs) because I can't get anything better.

Wanna know where the nerf really hurt? Right here, where this monk does pathetic damage because of bad itemization.

People have to remember that not everyone can get 15/20 weapons, and that's not where balance should start.

</p>

10-21-2002, 05:25 PM

Damage: Rogue >>> Monk > War

Tanking: War >>> Monk > Rogue.

In as few words as possible: Broken.

-Korph

<a href="http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=308735">http://gjband.com/Sig.jpg
Level 51 Disciple</a></p>

Fopoodzo

10-21-2002, 06:10 PM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> I don't think anyone's really saying warriors outdamage us, but they get surprisingly close at various points in a monk's life, and given that our current defensive capabilities are closer to rogues than warriors, I personally feel that we should have offensive capabilities closer to rogues than warriors. In my personal experience, that's just not there. <hr></blockquote>

Exactly.

</p>

Jinpo

10-22-2002, 01:05 AM

Just wanted to /bump

Hey Absor, we're still waiting.

<html><body>
<table BORDER COLS=1 WIDTH="250" BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF" ><tr><td>
<p style="margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0"><font size=1>Diciple Jinpo Cai'Feng (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=266967)</font>
<font color="#000099"><font size=1>52nd Echelon Drunken Ashen Monk</font></font>
<font color="#000099"><font size=1>Officer, The Legion of the Bear</font></font>
<font color="#000099"><font size=1>Saryrn</font></font>
<p style="margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0"><font color="#000099" size="2">"Water can flow, or water can crash. Be like the nature of water."</font>

10-22-2002, 01:39 AM

Wubao,

I'm a fairly typical 57th level Monk, with reasonable non-uber gear, in a reasonable non-uber guild.

I'm using, and have been using a 38/40 IFS since 52nd level. Typical of a broad swathe of Monks. Many monks in my ballpark will simply settle for their Epic+SoS.

I'm sat alongside Warriors (and Knights) in my guild wielding Frostreavers 42/43 with proc.

My damage tables at 57th are only slightly above that of a Warrior (55th being the small increase, and 60th being the more substantial increase).

The difference between our damage output is marginal. If the Warrior isn't tanking, but is able instead to use Offensive, they will in fact be outdamaging me.

The Warriors in this ballpark tank now far far far better than I.

Stop thinking of just the players that have been 60th for a long time in a substantial guild. Class balance covers a lot more. There are many points in a Monks life were the Monk is not cleanly ahead in the damage stakes in the same way the Rogue is.

Also consider these Warriors will smoothly progress. All the way through aquiring plate drops in Kael, I got nadda. We're now in HoT, and I've got my one bracer which is cool because of its utility, and am looking forward to the 6ac legs because they allow me to scrape together some more hp..... big long gap then until we're finally NToV capable.

Then the jump is massive for me.... once we're NToV capable. Until then the Warriors smoothly get more and more powerful.

Remember, many many players will NEVER see NToV, and you cannot balance a class on the basis of NToV... god I wish they'd just nuke that zone from the game.

edit: and its worth adding that I effectively got nerfed today for the NToV jump I will possibly make at some point in the future.... I have to get there just to be where I was yesterday. Until then its 6ac not 47ac legs I have to look forward to.

<hr />
<div>
Xarnak "Death to all fanatics" Clawfist (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=266873), Iksar Monk of Xev.
</div>
<div>
Dubious member of Hawkestone (http://pub72.ezboard.com/bhawkestone).
</div>

<div>

"I stare, it stares back.

I long to know its feelings.

It demurs. Lunch, then."

</div></p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/ucarnagh.showPublicProfile?language=EN>Carnagh</A> at: 10/21/02 10:30:03 pm

10-22-2002, 07:57 AM

>>Monks are the best with their fists.

Small consolation when fists are suck at 60. Right. yeah! <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/wink.gif ALT=";)"> I'll use my 14/26 or 9/16 over any weapons i should ever get.

Sensei Lucsa Kurobuchi (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=195825)

Crusaders of Plilo (http://www.raarcentral.com/)</p>

Wubao

10-22-2002, 08:29 AM

gah ... I wrote a reply that was just too long, and really not worth reading.

If you think warriors are so freakin broken and do such amazing damage, I highly suggest you play one.

My level 48 warrior is doing just fine. But he's certainly not my monk.

-Wu

</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/bmonklybusiness43508.showLocalUserPublicProfile?lo gin=wubao>Wubao</A> at: 10/22/02 4:52:10 am

Fopoodzo

10-22-2002, 09:22 AM

Who said warrior damage was broken?

Personally I said monk damage (and ONLY in light of the defensive nerf) was.

There's a big difference.

</p>

10-22-2002, 11:25 AM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>

If you think warriors are so freakin broken and do such amazing damage, I highly suggest you play one.

<hr></blockquote>

Even you know that's inadequate as a response.

And I'm not out to nerf Warriors, I simply think Monk damage needs to be closer to Rogues now.

Oh, and your 48th Warrior doesn't have offensive... 45th-50th (actually borader range) Monks are well clear of Warriors in damage because their pre-50 caps are so much better.

If you read my post I dont claim that there's a problem across the board. I claim that the problem exists in a range that many many players find themselves in, and will be in for a considerable amount of time.

<hr />
<div>
Xarnak "Death to all fanatics" Clawfist (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=266873), Iksar Monk of Xev.
</div>
<div>
Dubious member of Hawkestone (http://pub72.ezboard.com/bhawkestone).
</div>

<div>

"I stare, it stares back.

I long to know its feelings.

It demurs. Lunch, then."

</div></p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/ucarnagh.showPublicProfile?language=EN>Carnagh</A> at: 10/22/02 7:29:36 am

Fopoodzo

10-23-2002, 03:25 AM

Warrior damage isn't too high, just too close to monk damage (post nerf) when you see the defensive change.

With warriors now clearly ahead defensively (to monks) and rogues now not clear sub-par (to monks) defensively.

Warrior damage being too close to monks whilst rogue damage is still way out ahead is unbalanced.

Monks don't need rogue type damage, but they do need a small proportional damage increase to offset the defensive nerf.

As several people have said, if VI wants to nerf monks into ONLY being damage dealers then they'd better make sure they ARE damage dealers.

</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/bmonklybusiness43508.showUserPublicProfile?gid=fop oodzo@monklybusiness43508>Fopoodzo</A> at: 10/22/02 11:29:02 pm

10-23-2002, 06:55 AM

on rogue tanking, was grouped with a 51 rouge (am 52 monk) in chardok, I was MT because we had no war/pal/rng, and rogue kept getting aggro but wasn't taking a huge dmg compared to when I had aggro.

Buffed I was at 2048 hp

He was at 1200

With Evade, he never went be low 60% health

I hit 20-30% and took a lot of heals.

(60 Druid was healer)

Rogues have the damage and will gain aggro a lot, but with their skills are given the ability to not just mitigate dmg, but can reduce their aggro without the reduction in DPS that FD causes.

</p>

Fopoodzo

10-23-2002, 01:18 PM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> Rogues have the damage and will gain aggro a lot, but with their skills are given the ability to not just mitigate dmg, but can reduce their aggro without the reduction in DPS that FD causes. <hr></blockquote>

Yep that's another issue with the tanking nerf, to control agro a monk is further reducing thier DPS. Again, I feel, reason in light of the mitigation nerf to bring monk DPS closer (although probably not too close) to rogue DPS.

</p>

10-23-2002, 03:24 PM

Just out of curiosity, since you bring up DPS and Agro control. Alot of people are calling for damage upgrade to a monk (and I personally agree, we're too low on damage to fit into the damage dealer nitch...more on that later)...then in the next sentence you start talking about loosing DPS whenever you have to FD off for agro control. Wouldn't a Larger DPS Table = More Agro = More FD = Less DPS overall?

BTW, I'm 38 in Tenebrous Mountains, against Grimlings. Me, a 35 Pali, A necro and a Shaman. I was the puller and in most battles Main tank...however there wasn't one battle where I didn't loose agro at LEAST once, if not twice to the paladin...now from what I know of agro, the one doing the most damage is the one who builds agro. So if he took agro from me in a fight it was because he was doing more damage.

Why do I bring this up? Because I feel i've got a pretty damn good kit of equip (About 40K plat worth) particularly my AC and SoS (14/25, 14/27) weapons, +31% haste....and my maxed 1HB, + my Flying Kick...and he's still pulling agro from me, using 2Hs with a 22% haste item. Yes, he's twinked, but he's not THAT well twinked. Bottom line is if you tell me i'm a master of damage, I ask you why I am loosing agro to a Paladin with inferior equipment, lower haste, and slower weapons?

Tsarakien Roycroft

Monk of the 37th Circle

Prexus Server

My Magelo. (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=352669)

<p align="center">http://mysite.freeserve.com/Intereo_Liberi/mythresult/dragon.jpg (http://mysite.freeserve.com/Intereo_Liberi/test3.htm)

I took the What Mythological Creature Are you? (http://mysite.freeserve.com/Intereo_Liberi/test3.htm) test by

<lj user=peacefulchaos> !</p></p>

10-23-2002, 05:31 PM

Does no one use this hotkey during raid situations?

/attack off

/doability (whatever number you set FD as in the abilities tab)

/con

/sit on(or off can't remember as I am at work)

/attack on

The only missed attacks you get are if your MT moves the mob...

Sometimes it works completely and you dump agro off for the rest of the fight, some times it transfers it to the warrior untill you can try again, sometimes it doesn't work at all... after all it is a SKILL not an inate ability that suggests immediate success.

I am equiped better than all the warriors in my guild ... I run t staff or Whistling fists... I probably out do the rogues as well as they only have epic and no increase attack items... My Ac is not stellar only arround 1152 after epic and WF effect but i run about 2700 hps... which is still lower than the level 56 warrior who has better AC and hps 1170 ac and 3000 hps... he is wearing primarily thurg drops, no BP but has the hate one ... he can tank better than I can... but cannot hold agro... the problem isn't the monks tanking ability or the damage ability of any class, its the availability of equipment at said level...

Warriors/plate classes progress smoothly armor wise once 55+ and kael enters the game, hate and fear included in this arena as well.

Rogues/chain classes get screwed cause the drops don't exsist and/or the plane drops blow donkey balls

caster loot sucks pre ubah... /shrug nuff said there

monks... the all/all big ticket items are the "best" in slot and usefulness to be an effect puller/damage dealer/soloer/quester

And as someone else pointed out the monks closing the gap on plate class AC and passing it doesnt start happening until the AoW mobs and beyond start dropping the god loots that say monk only on them or all / all...

a warrior will always have 1200 more hps than a monk... no point in comparing equiped and buffed stats, compare the naked body's ... monks will have HIGHER AC! HIGHER ATTACK and crap for hps like 1600 with ND3 or something like that...

a naked warrior will last longer standing toe to toe with a mob than a monk... FD is all that saves us... thier 1100 more hps saves a warrior(assumeing they can get to zone or something)

What needs to be changed is the availability of hate generating weapons and damage dealing weapons for warriors...

its like this

monk armor : prior to ubah progression scale is uneven. large gaps

monk weapons : prior to ubah prgression exists not many gaps

warrior armor : prior to ubah progression scale is even, not many gaps

warrior armor : prior to ubah(some would say the ubah isn't ubah enough) progression is broken REAL bad, huge gaps

all in all this nerf forces us, like the damage increase to rogue, to control our agro... and be more aggressive about it or be dead at the end of all the encounters...

Again if the goal was to put warriors back into the tanking spot, they should have fixed what was wrong, 1)taunt 2)lack of hate generating weapons that are reasonably viable for 55+ 3)scaled back the attractiveness of the all all items to monks IE ADD SOME WEIGHT !!!

All three of those changes would have made warriors number one tanks, would have shifted monks towards attack increasing items instead of AC hp ones and not pissed off probably the largest playing group in the game...

what do i know ... /shrug i used to play this game cause it was fun now I go out FD infront of women at the bar!

Kegnar

59 monk

Lor Mani

Quellious

</p>

10-23-2002, 08:29 PM

Well, from what I gather the main problem appears to be that this monk 'nerf' affects the average monk player and not the "high end" or "uber" monk. At least that is the impression I received from the majority of the well written posts I have read.

If this is the case then I may have a proposal.

This is idea is based severl pieces of information:

1. That higher level ac revieces diminishing return depending on the mobs attack rating. The assumption is that the magic # is 1200. Which perhaps is a good goal for the majority of the mobs encountered for solo / group xp situation, non-raid encounter situations. (there are some very good posts based on this)

2. There are 2 types of AC. Mitigation and Avoidance.

3. The problem that Verant attempt to address and corret was that monks with high levels of ac were mitigating damage as well as a plate class. (Never mind that Verant should not have let things get to this point in the first place, but this is the reality of the current situation.) So they completely altered the way monks mitigate damage and gave an extremely hard to notice increase to monk avoidance.

3.A. This change to monk mitigation/avoidance has effected all levels of play for monks altering the way the class has been played since the fixes made to Monks during the Kunark era.

4. The difficulties reported are as follows:

4.A. Taking more damge and being hit more often. For the average to below average monk.

4.B.. Not being able to pull efficiently because of being hit more often at max damage. For the average to below average monk.

4.C. Not being able to solo well because of being hit more often for max damage. For the average to below average monk.

5. There are several requests that stand out as fixes to this situation:

5.A. Put everything back to the way it was. There was nothing wrong to begin with.

5.B. If this change stands then increase avoidance significantly without having to rely on getting AA skills.

5.C. If this change stays then in order to balance out a monk taking more damage a monk should do more damage.

After all of this and taking some time out to think things through I leave the following suggestion out there for the monk and other classes to think about.

1. Put things back the way they were.

2. Increase the avoidance tables to adjust to other classes receiving the small upgrades to avoidance skills such as dodge.

3. (the big one) Alter the values of AC mitigation for those monks whose AC goes beyond the magic # of ac of 1200 (refer back to # 1 where if this is the magic # for the majority of mobs) to decrease in value drastically. Therefore a monk who has (for example) 800 avoidance AC would only require 400 ac of mitigation recieved from actually wearing armor. So if you want those uber 60 ac legs you may want to have smaller ac for other areas. Perhaps high stat resist items, or items with lower ac but carry stats / resists / hps and such.

Also, you open options for the monk class. For example you go to FG you put on your gear set to hit that nice 1200 ac with whatever resists / hps etc.... You go to PoD where the magic number changes to say 1500 for the average mob encountered, then Monks put on the higher end gear they obtained.

This leaves the regular - non high end - uber monk alone while 'nerfing' the high end monk which is apparently creating the "monk tanking problem" in the first place.

However, all monks would be actually avoiding more, but when being hit, being hit for more to max damage.

</p>

Phylassein

10-23-2002, 11:46 PM

We need to stop pissing in each others beer.

Get on with the business of => HEY ABSOR!!!!!!!

Do you or any of the VI Flunkies ever read and actually respond to the monks?

Here's the question(s):

Want monks to be tanks? - then fix it so it will be so.....

Want monks to pull? - then fix it so it will be so.....

Where in any form of abject reasoning is the fix (nerf) you did helpful - other then letting the Uba's stay there and not relearn, as the NON-Uba's will undoubtedly have to?

I remember where in the learning threads and the strats threads that monks in certain situations were recommended to back the pull into camp - well, make it so we can still avoid the damages , AND move at the needed speeds backing up.

I remember many threads trying to dissect what a monk is - i.e. martial arts specialist and specialist at avoidance - fix it so it is so; Don't play the nerf games you are doing with the "fixes" that have occurred - they are not the way to make things work for your customers - they only helped or actually benefitted the Uba monks, who won't lose out due to their already too high AC, etc.

I have a main that is an enchanter - I've seen lots of this type of VI "know it all" behavior as it passed out things to others who weren't satisfied with their chosen roles - or envious of what others could do, and the Infamous VI fixes that chased loads of Enchanters from the game (permanently).

If you did what you did, as many suggest, in response to Furor - or what ever the H*** his name is, then tell us, and get on with repairing the damage your fix has brought about to the normal, NON-Uba, monks. And tell the warrior elitist that he is but one customer of VI, no matter how many hours he spends running a "Uba" guild.

This game is that, a game - one of thousands on the market. Yes, one that has many many addicts( aka hobbiests) playing and learning the many in-roads and strategies of their chosen roles - and personally, you and many of your Developers need lessons in business management if this is how you treat your ever-growing child (EQ).

You, at VI are proud to break in the game and announce accomplishments of 100K people online at once, etc, blah, blah.......... or let us know about this or that GM doing whatever........ I would love to see a patch message saying , " oops, the Monk fix of 10/02 patch so-and-so, was a mistake, it has been remedied "....to the intended nerfage of those Uba, over-AC's higher end monks as you stated it was really meant for in the beginning - and normal monk players can resume their enjoyment of the game they selected.

Sorry, been part of two nerfed classes, and really wondering why I do stay in EQ - I know why, but thats another story......and hate losing friends .

*Galopicasze, 25th season of monkly-ness

- Master Enchasze Phylassein

- Phantasmist - Epic holder - Dire enabled

- <Myriad> TP server

And, others but list too long to remember them all.

</p>

10-24-2002, 01:01 AM

Bunch of anti-monk morons?

My question is: A SK, ranger, warrior, rogue, monk and bard shout LFG. You have one opening. Which would you choose?

Warrior and SK: Great tanks

Rogue: Backstabbing, dps is incredibly high

Ranger: Dual wield, high DPS, can sow and snare

Bard: Hmmm...only 1 opening in your group? Bard brings a lot of benefit.

OK. Why in the world would you REALLY want to have the monk?

Pulling? Perhaps. Monks have FD. So do SK's. Sure Sk's FD is a crappy version, but my FD still fails and I"m flopping around like a fish too. SK's have more HPs and can use a nice bow to pull with.

And anyway, it's BS that FD makes you that much of a greater puller anyway.

Post lvl 35, the MOB has a very good chance of remembering you when you get back up. FD, sit, stand, FD, sit, stand, FD, sit, stand--while you're doing this, your party is just sitting there. True, you haven't trained 'em, but an SK with SOW running to zone probably is less group downtime--especially since that's a certainty whereas the monk FD'ing doesn't know how long its gonna take to get rid of aggro--and may have to /quit out and come back in.

Monks have mend. Mend is nice. Monks take more damage though now than plate classes. Mend will be used much more. Paladin's get LOH. SK's can lifetap. Ranger's have their heal spells and both ranger's and paladins can use these spells ON OTHER GROUP MEMBERS!

If LAY OF HANDS, was something new, and Verant talked about creating a melee class that had the power to completely heal, from zero to full, themselves or any other group member---hmmm....maybe we'd be talking about nerfing paladins.

Which, by the way, Verant almost did to paladin's slay undead ability. Paladin's encounters against UNDEAD with this ability, one could make the case, overpowers them--what one critical for five thousand? However, the paladin community complained and got the nerf canceled. All a paladin has to do is head to a dungeon that has undead in it, and a group will want him. Oh yeah, I didn't even include paladins in my initial LFG list, did I ? Hmmm, I guess it's even worse for monks!

Oh yeah, monks FD. Nice ability. So is SOW. Snare. Darkness. Tracking. Harm Touch. Taunt. Choose the spell you want: Want Fear, an SK has it. It's an animal, the ranger has Fear Animal.

Maybe the monk should be glad their the third best damage dealer, as one poster said. We're still above warriors. We should be happy. Not cry that we can't solo mobs other classes would never dream of solo'ing. Hmmm what kind of bullshit is this? Necro's, druids, mages, wizards with jboots, shaman's are all classes great for solo'ing. Rogues and warriors have trouble solo'ing--but make the best tanks and rogues rule in fast pulling groups.

So the monk can't solo, big deal, rogues and warriors have faced this for years. The big deal is that Monks can't solo, and who wants the monk in a group? Hmmm? Ok, I"d probably take a monk over a wizard, but ....that's going pretty low on the scale.

When I was taking max damage from mobs, because warrior ubber morons noticed monks could tank high level, and Verant's premise is that plate wearing classes should take less damage, I wondered why don't mobs in Everquest go by the same rules? The tribals are naked and don't take max damage from me and I"ve got a helluva lot better equipment than he does!

Any class, with ubber gear, can look overpowered. Bards with unlimited manna. Their heal song at high levels can heal more than a cleric. According to Verant, this would be analogous to the monk v. warrior situation--thus Bard's healing song would be nerfed.

If you want something like reality and can't believe a robe wearing monk should take less damage than a warrior, well, I don't believe a Bard's song can heal us, do damage to monsters without doing damage to us, mez, charm, slow monsters without slowing everyone else that hears it. If a monster doesn't have hearing, it shouldn't be effected. Musicians also have to stop to play and I've seen very few running around at high speeds while playing. In fact most have screen music in front of them.

So, for realism, Bards:

NO unlimited "manna"

Can't move while playing

Have to read "their sheet music" unless it's a song in their speciality

Have to take breaks (10 minutes for every hour, just like a real band).

Intelligent monsters will simply ignore the Bard's music as white noise.

Bard songs effect everyone that hears them equally, if it damages a monster, it damages the party. Heal the same way.

Nerf bard healing songs--clerics are the premier healers of the game

Nerf Bard mezzes--same for enchanters.

Umm. Now high level bards have access to high ubber all/all gear. This has created an inbalance blah blah blah they're wearing the same crap as monks and thus they should be even more overpowered. A high level bard, with COF, proc'ing ubber weapons, and hasted by an enchanter, KICKS arse in melee.

So, why pick on monks ???

For all you freakin' moron monks who say grunt and take it, interesting how you yourselves can't take it when someone flames your idiocy on the board and have to reply. And for these disloyal monks, I'm bettin you're kinda used to gruntin' and takin' it in your real life job at the chicken plant.

</p>

Fopoodzo

10-24-2002, 03:49 AM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> Wouldn't a Larger DPS Table = More Agro = More FD = Less DPS overall? <hr></blockquote>

Some methods of giving monks more damage would increase agro a lot (not good example but sticking damaging procs on weapons), others wouldn't (slight increase to the damage table - in line with the defensive nerf, small offhand bonus - although even a small one of these could end up being too much).

Agro's a funny thing, not just hits and damage affecting it, but things like healing and distance from mob as well.

However the main point is that IF VI sees monks as damage dealers (which from the nerf they seem to do) and intend to make monks ONLY damage dealers by nerfing thier defensive ability (which they HAVE done).

Then monks need the tools to be damage dealers. Rogues and rangers (2 classes that are classed as 'damage dealers') both have methods of lowering themselves on the hate list without massively impacting thier damage output.

Which was fine when rogues and rangers couldn't take the hits and a monk could.

But now monks are only slightly better tanks than rogues if at all, and rangers are equal if not better tanks than monks.

So now not only do monks not stack up to rogues and rangers in the offence/defence balance (and also lose out to warriors although not quite in the same way), but they don't have the tools to do the job they've been nerfed into efficently anyway.

</p>

10-24-2002, 04:51 AM

While I only skimmed some of the posts on this thread, I can understand all your frustration. I tried to ask a certain VI guy "what is to become of us monks" and so far no answer. I believe our dmg and tanking is fine... but since our utility has decreased as soloers and offtanks, we might need to gain that back in a different area of gameplay.

Since it seems that VI and certain other individuals (Thott, hi) want less puller and more melee into the monk class, I thought it would be cool to pump some utility into monks by recycling the old and unused special attacks like the dragon punch AA did. How's this going to happen when monks of all levels are affected by the recent nerf? How would round kick 2.0 be worthy for both low and high level monks? Well how about each special have a certain effect and for everytime your dmg table changes the effect gets stronger as well? Shouldn't monks be able to strike calculating blows to the opponent to snare them by kicking their leg or dot them by causing internal bleeding? Monks should remain mundane creatures with the ability to do amazing feats, dragon punch AA aside, it doesn't look like we have much as far as combat feats go.

I simply don't understand why monks don't have more than they do now. I would list the abilities each melee has and compare but all you experienced monks already know we're sort of "blah" right now. A monk has lots of good abilities but they are selfish ones. That is why we are/were good soloists. But with the mitigation taken away and with no apparent avoiddance added.. is it time to put back the desirability of grouping a monk by adding some group friendly abilities? It would not hurt, imo.

Grandmaster Denzalo - Afterlife (http://www.afterlifeguild.org/members.cgi?page=details&character=Denzalo>Profile</a>
Guild) of Mithaniel Marr</p>

Fopoodzo

10-24-2002, 06:04 AM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr> I simply don't understand why monks don't have more than they do now. I would list the abilities each melee has and compare but all you experienced monks already know we're sort of "blah" right now. A monk has lots of good abilities but they are selfish ones. That is why we are/were good soloists. But with the mitigation taken away and with no apparent avoiddance added.. is it time to put back the desirability of grouping a monk by adding some group friendly abilities? It would not hurt, imo. <hr></blockquote>

That's definitely another way to go, in light of the nerf VI do need to examine the monk class in light of other pure melee and hybrid abilities (both offence/defence balance and utility).

</p>

Pokiri

10-24-2002, 10:06 AM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>

I tried to ask a certain VI guy "what is to become of us monks" and so far no answer.

<hr></blockquote>

I think that sums up everything.

So odd that a non-hybrid class should have such a confused role.

</p>

10-24-2002, 11:26 AM

I'd really like an answer to this Absor.

I can't take damage but my damage output pulls agro on me like an overnuking raid wizard. To save myself death & party mana I have to FD, which dramatically cuts my damage output. This is a horrible circle I've been put in.

my only solution is to be grouped with an SK my level as tank or a warrior 4+ levels higher that remembers (s)he has a Taunt Button.

The Monk Nerf has made my Damage Dealing highly situational.

What is my Role Absor?

Rikimaru 51 Disciple of Cazic-Thule

<Battered & Bruised by the Nerf Bat>

Tunare Server

</p>

10-24-2002, 12:45 PM

I'd also like an answer... After seeing a bard tank better than me with the same mobs, and having comparable gear and stats, I want to know why this bard should be able to tank better than a monk who supposedly is a master of the body. At least, doesn't it say that in the description?

Dying 5-10 times a night pulling, instead of maybe once or twice, is rediculous. My clerics are tired of rezzing me, tired of buffing for sure. Splitting 4c was hard enough in cazic. And while I would go there before, I won't go there now. Unless I'm not pulling, because it's such a waste of time if I'm doing it now. I think what bothers me the most is not only Verant ignoring us, but also that when I hit 60, the nerf hit, and now I can't do half of what I used to at even 55. Some advancement that was. It's dumb, I'm tired of it..

And this isn't the only thing, actually receiving a response from a GM that a guide would say would talk to you, never happens. I've never seen a server GM since legends went live.

</p>

10-24-2002, 12:55 PM

Yes, what is our role?

Rogue better dps.

SK better pull.

Warrior better tank.

I guess our role is reroll another toon or quit.

Thanks for nothing Verant.

Valdor

</p>

10-24-2002, 01:27 PM

* Monk Defense. Finally, the issue of defensive ability needs to be addressed with respect to Monks. Monks in EverQuest were originally intended to be a class with excellent offensive potential, both with and without equipment. This ability came at the expense of having only passable defensive abilities, partially in the form of an extremely small, restrictive selection of equipment from which to choose.

This, of course, caused its own series of problems of how to adequately reward the person behind the character. It did not take long for universally equippable items (ALL/ALL items) to be considered by and large as "Monk Loot," as far back as before the launch of Kunark.

Over time, Monks' defensive abilities had been tuned up to correct a perceived weakness. This, taken in combination with a few years of universally equippable, low-weight, high powered items entering the game, slowly transformed Monks into what is arguably the strongest defensive class in the game. Monks get hit less than any other class, and due to the tuning over time, no longer take appreciably more damage when they do get hit.

This imbalance between the classes does need to be addressed in order for the Plate-wearing classes in the game to have their proper relative power. The Plate-wearing classes in the game take a serious penalty to their offensive abilities in order to defend as well as they can, and we cannot fix this problem solely by inflating their defensive abilities to compensate for this. Again, that type of change would harm EverQuest as a whole much more than altering the one class. Likewise, we have no desire to retroactively alter all of the equipment in the game that is contributing to this problem.

Monk defense will be altered somewhat. It is no secret that in EverQuest, a character's Armor Class does not compare equally across different classes. (A Wizard with 1000 AC defends differently than a Warrior with 1000AC, for example.) It's not the most optimal system, for sure, but it is the one that many people have had much time to get used to. As such, Monk defense will be altered such that they may continue wearing the same equipment, however, they will get a decreased benefit to their overall ability to take damage.

Again, we have no desire to make monks unable to take any type of punishment -- far from it. What we are primarily striving for is maintaining the defensive order of the Plate classes being able to take the most punishment, followed by the Chain classes and Monks. The latter being technically a Leather wearing class who will continue to make up the difference by being able to avoid more blows than the rest."

</p>

Fopoodzo

10-24-2002, 02:43 PM

Lol, I don't know what you think you're achieveing posting the patch message again and again everywhere.

Believe me EVERY monk is VERY familar with that bit of text.

Never-the-less it doesn't really explain very much about HOW the nerf was done, nor what they intend to do (if anything) about the ways in which a monk is now subpar.

Nor about the envisioned role of a monk post-nerf (unless the role was subpar to pretty much every other class in every situation).

Depending on what the envisioned role is to be post nerf (purely damage dealer etc.) then post nerf they need to do one (not all, just one) of the following:

1. Increase avoidance so damage taken is same as pre-nerf, only more is avoided now mitigated.

2. Increase inate monk damage (either through upgrading the damage tables again or something like an offhand damage bonus)

3. Give monks some group utility.

4. Un-nerf monk and use alternative solution. i.e. Fix Taunt and make monks generate less hate (thanks Korph <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/smile.gif ALT=":)"> ) or give warriors a mitigation bonus.

</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/bmonklybusiness43508.showUserPublicProfile?gid=fop oodzo@monklybusiness43508>Fopoodzo</A> at: 10/24/02 10:47:33 am

SkyKungfu

10-24-2002, 03:54 PM

Keamil u retard stop posting the patch message all over our board.

Sky

</p>

10-24-2002, 06:06 PM

When you have a really narrow mind it is easy to not see the big picture ...

Rogue better dps.

SK better pull.

Warrior better tank.

This seems to be what everyone is focusing on. If you look a little harder though, the picture it doesn't look quite so bad ...

DPS:

1. Rogue (Ranger situationally)

2. Monk

3. Ranger

4. Warrior

5. Knights

Indoor Pullers:

1. Monk (SK situationally)

2. SK

3. Necro

Non uber mob tanks:

1. Warrior (SK, Pali, Monk situationally)

2. Monk

3. SK

4. Pali

<div align="center" class="font-size: 11px; font-family: arial">
http://www.boomspeed.com/wandor/Wandor_sig.jpg

Wandor (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=6103) | Moordian (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=6102) | Wandorfu (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=353608)

Fusion of Flame (http://www.exarch.net/)</div></p>

Fopoodzo

10-24-2002, 06:22 PM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Non uber mob tanks:

1. Warrior (SK, Pali, Monk situationally)

2. Monk

3. SK

4. Pali <hr></blockquote>

Post nerf you're offbase a bit there, post nerf monks would be at the bottom of that, maybe even under rangers.

Looking at the wider picture it looks something like below, the main issue is that in almost every situation one class does almost everything better than a monk (post-nerf), yet the one thing monks are still supposed to be, in fact the thing monks are being nerfed into being, toe to toe damage dealer, monks no longer really have the tools to equip them for it.

i.e not enough damage when compared to warriors (real tanks), or many hybrids, plus an inability to take hits, and no ability to reduce hate without also reducing DPS, not good. <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/frown.gif ALT=":(">

pre-nerf (damage) rogue>>>monk>warrior

(tanking) warrior>monk>rogue

post-nerf (damage) rogue>>>monk>warrior

(tanking) warrior>>monk>=rogue

To make it balanced in the role VI seems to be nerfing monks into, that of pure damage dealer, it would have to be something like this:

(damage) rogue>>monk>>warrior

(tanking) warrior>>monk>=rogue

(rogues still come out ahead, but their damage is more situational)

Not to mention that hybrids are beginning to equal monk in damage, tanking and still have spells etc (which also renders FD less useful as FD pulling in many cases is now better done with a SK than a monk).

</p>

Buhd

10-24-2002, 06:42 PM

One thing Ive noticed is I get chanters and shammies killed a lot now.

Since I dont want to tank/cant tank I FD a lot more in XP groups and it seems chanters are usually right after me for aggro.

FD

mob shouts 'CHANTER you wont evade me, I keel you'

chanter dies or comes close

Stand up and attack

Poor chanters they getting killed by our nerfs, I guess thats part of our new role, to nerf chanters xp gain.

Brotor Tiller

60 Monk

Rathe

League of Levity

<A HREF=http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=153704>Brotor Tiller geeeeer</a></p>

10-24-2002, 08:37 PM

It's the old "hybrid" paradox that paladins were caught in. The place for a monk to be is between warrior and rogue in terms of damage and defence. The "balanced" warrior if you will.

However the hybrid has to be almost as good as both parent classes or it takes a massive penalty for never being the best at anything. Paladin's used to have 80% warrior DPS and woefully inferior cleric spells. So while they could fight and heal they would never actually do anything well. And an efficient party, or raid, always wants the best.

At the moment monks are sizeably outdamaged by rogues. If you have to add the most damage for one group slot you would be insane to pick anything else. That would be cool if monks were reasonable tanks as well. Such that warrior, monk and monk, rogue would be synergistic partnerships.

But they pushed it too far I think. The monk is now such a poor tank that they are often unsatisfactory as tanks. Meaning that their only claim to fame is damage, which they are inferior to rogues in and not always that much higher than warriors or rangers outside of end game weapons.

</p>

10-24-2002, 10:26 PM

I'm just curious. Where did all this suddenly arise that warriors were dealing close to the damage of a monk? On a post-nerf parse from Statue, our top monk parsed out about 9.5 DPS higher than our top warrior. Comparitively speaking, that was about 16-17% better. In that scenario; the warrior had far better damage equipment (TSBS (53/45) vs. primal 2hb (45/44). The warrior was also in the bard group; which means he had higher ATK and additional haste. Had all situations been normal, and we were parsing our top warrior damage dealer vs. our top monk damage dealer under the same damage-dealing scenarios; I have no doubt the monk would parse out at least 30% more damage than teh warrrior. Even if the monk parsed out 25%; this is far more than the 5% some people here are suggesting.

</p>

10-25-2002, 04:09 AM

Warrior Damage, better than monk damage ... you are smoking crack, and lots of it ... laced with heroin or something.

Last statue raid i remember parsed (we stopped parsing after our statue days, it got to be too much work):

Warrior average Damage ~11k

Monk average Damage ~ 20k

seems a bigger gap that just 5%

At 59, West ToV/North ToV weapons ... i have a hard time keeping up in damage with a monk 5 levels lower than me, with his fists.

Yes monks ... a Warrior weilding NToV/WToV weapons, is outdamaged by a monk and his fists. With equal gear said monk would have his epic.

Monk epic not even in the same league as ToV weapons ... its much earlier in the game.

the difference between monk damage and warrior damage is so insane, how can you even try to compare.

Even using 2handers, monks will own me for damage.

so stop whining, you got what you needed. Balance.

Monks were described as a class that does a decent amount of damage, armed or unarmed, with equiptment or without, with penaltys in defense, due to there lack of available gear.

You just got your penalty in defense, which was one of the principal explainations of your class.

Monks are traditionally, by definition, scholars and priests of martial disciplines. Monks are poor, they have no need for wealth, and they get by with what they have, without complaint.

All i see is a bunch of children that didnt get that carton of milk before nap time.

Ive read through this post, front to end ... and it took me a while, and i was curious.

Most of you have no clue what your talking about when it comes to warrior damage. Bards outdamage us. Bards and melee casters. Yes monks, warriors have some of the worst DPS in the game, why, because a tank knows hes not there to do damage, he equips himself to hold aggro any way he can, this means aggro procs (Slows, stuns, dots, debuffs, Enraging blow), usually at the cost of DPS, DDs arnt aggro procs, neither are lifetaps, thats why a wizzy can chain nuke against a good tank and not get summoned (i know from experiance).

so yeah ... continue your holy crusade to get warrior damage nerfed ... or monk damage increased ... just know that youll be tanking, because if you do any more damage than your already insane numbers, it wont matter what kind of outrageous double EB procing 40/10 weapons a warrior gets his hand on, we wont be able to keep aggro from a monk. Its hard enough as it is, because you do so much damage compared to us.

Master Xith N'Shezbenon

Sorcerer of Dark Templars

--BATTLE WIZARD--

Smakz Mabytchup

Myrmidon of Dark Templars

--KITTY!!--

Xith's Stuff (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=90995)

Smakz's Stuff (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=178712)

--Remember The Grey--

</p>

Fopoodzo

10-25-2002, 04:21 AM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>At the moment monks are sizeably outdamaged by rogues. If you have to add the most damage for one group slot you would be insane to pick anything else. That would be cool if monks were reasonable tanks as well. Such that warrior, monk and monk, rogue would be synergistic partnerships.

But they pushed it too far I think. The monk is now such a poor tank that they are often unsatisfactory as tanks. Meaning that their only claim to fame is damage, which they are inferior to rogues in and not always that much higher than warriors or rangers outside of end game weapons.<hr></blockquote>

Yup post nerf there's little reason to take a monk over anyone else (only real reason is where FD pulling is vital and a SK can do that better than a monk in a lot of cases - plus VI doesn't support FD pulling).

Pure melee balance has been thrown out of the window, it wouldn't take much to regain it, a small damage increase or a small avoidance increase, or un-nerfing monks and giving warriors a mitigation bonus. (imagine that <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/smile.gif ALT=":)"> )

</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/bmonklybusiness43508.showUserPublicProfile?gid=fop oodzo@monklybusiness43508>Fopoodzo</A> at: 10/25/02 6:00:51 am

10-25-2002, 10:34 AM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Monks were described as a class that does a decent amount of damage, armed or unarmed, with equiptment or without, with penaltys in defense, due to there lack of available gear.<hr></blockquote>

Wow. You make playing a monk sound like so much fun. No wonder we got nerfed.

</p>

10-25-2002, 10:48 AM

Guys it's simple...

They don't care about monks anymore... We can get anyone to give us a post nerf analysis from their point of view.

We all know what happened. Absor and the rest just don't care.

April 11th 1999... Absor, We've been with you since the start some even longer, doesn't that mean anything to you people ?

*furstration*

Manaux Sanginar

60th Grandmaster Bristlebane

</p>

10-25-2002, 10:58 AM

Heh, I joined EQ about 3 days after you. Done a ton of stuff in this game and really hate to quit over this, always imagined I would never quit EQ. But if Verant are going to force us back into our sub-par status of the Kunark days I'm not going to pay a subscription waiting for them to come to their senses.

</p>

10-25-2002, 11:28 AM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>If a Warrior is not being used to tank (a CHOICE) then he can hit offensive and for 3 minutes out of every 10 he does 40% more damage. This is significantly better than that which a monk can do. Warriors who aren't tanking do more damage.<hr></blockquote>

Could someone please tell me the command for the offensive discipline? I would like to try it out some time.

</p>

10-25-2002, 11:30 AM

/disc offensive

</p>

10-25-2002, 12:03 PM

There is no such thing as /disc offensive, ace.

Baron Draxus Diablus (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=6347)

Teir'Dal Warlord

In your spare time you may study the word of god, and my god says this: Get a sword, get on a horse, and go out and kill anyone who does not like you.</p>

10-25-2002, 12:18 PM

We have /disc aggressive at level 60. Calling it /disc offensive simply shows your ignorance of the ways of the warrior. It is a rarely used discipline. I've jokingly called it 'three minutes of being a ranger' before. We do more damage and take a hell of a lot more. Again, take time to notice the level. 60.

Those of you who actually believe that monks and warriors do roughly equal damage in roughly eqiovalent gear are in serious need of a cranial-rectal removal procedure. I'm not here to offer numbers or pick apart special abilities and attacks. Even your elders here know this to be true. Take time now to sit back and listen to them. Learn from your sensei and perhaps one day you will surpass them. Until then, you really are naught but a young grasshoppah.

</p>

10-25-2002, 12:23 PM

Not knowing the name of a discipline I dont have hardly changes my ability to comment on this nerf.

Since I haven't even made any claims myself regarding warrior damage it just shows that you are a pair of ill mannered trolls.

Then again, being able to look up the name of a disc on castersrealm sure does make you the monk experts eh?

Regarding people claiming warriors and monks do the same damage with the same gear, that is ludicrous. However the claim I have been reading here is that good warrior gear is quite simply cheaper and more available than good monk gear.

Since I havent had to equip a warrior I dont know if this is true or not, I do know that if I sold or transferred my droppable stuff I could probably equip a warrior that could solo pretty well.

</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/bmonklybusiness43508.showUserPublicProfile?gid=kaw aitanuki>Kawai Tanuki</A> at: 10/25/02 8:36:57 am

10-25-2002, 12:49 PM

Wychway is indeed correct. Our DPS is much greater than that of anyone other than Rogues and HIGH AAs Rangers with a good bow.

Here are some numbers taken from Dagarn the Destroyer fight....

Defendant (using Khasek's Katar and FoL + shovel of harvest at end of fight) - Monk

DPS - 49.95

Ssoulz (using simple Tstaff 29/30) - Monk

DPS - 48.23

Limbua (using simple Tstaff) - Monk

DPS - 47.96

-------

Katsuo - Rogue

DPS - 56.07

Them - Rogue

DPS - 59.58

-------------

Calas (using twisted bastard sword - 52/46 or something close) - Warrior

DPS - 35.54 (was in Def disc for last 1/4 of fight)

Getten (using epics) - Warrior

DPS - 24.53 (was in Def disc for 1/4 of the fight)

Rokosj (using 10/18 or better weapons) - Warrior

DPS - 27.04 (was not in Def disc)

Now normally, Calas gets fairly close to a nonuber weapon monk's DPS when he is not in defensive but the difference is all in the weapon. Even with 52/46 2hs he uses vs. 29/30 tstaff I was using, I would still just barely outdamage him when even when not in defensive.

Damage

Rogue >> monk >>> warrior

Tanking

Warrior > monk >>> rogue

That is about a correct comparison.

So why all the belly aching?

Rhizzen Khillahpriest <Darkblood>

54 Necromancer of Innoruuk

Sol Ro

Sensai Ssoulz Jah <Darkblood>

60 Grandmaster of Cazic Thule

Sol Ro

<div style="text-align:center">

Ssoulz Stuffz (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=405138)

http://www.thedragonseye.net/eq/Sensei%20Ssoulz%20signature.jpg

</div></p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/bmonklybusiness43508.showUserPublicProfile?gid=rhi zzen>Rhizzen</A> at: 10/25/02 8:52:52 am

10-25-2002, 12:58 PM

I think he's looking for /disc aggressive. I'm not sure if it's a complete inversion of /disc defensive, but the priniciple is the same. Increase dmg output for 3 minutes while also increasing damage you take. Also, /disc precision increases the chance to hit for 3 minutes with the same penalty as /aggressive.

The problem is that it seems every warrior is always dreaming non stop of the next chance to hit /defensive. It's a huge crutch and since it's overpowered, many warriors are reluctant to blow their disc on anything else. I've seen warriors who will most likely not take damage the entire night except for riposte/enrage never use any of their offensive disciplines.

Now if you're a warrior that is going to be the MA in a particular encounter, then you'd be a fool not to save your disc for /defensive. Unfortunately, many of the warriors out there *could* increase their dps significantly for 30 percent of the time by using another discipline. It's like the monks who aren't pulling on a raid saving their /disc for stonestance or voidance when there's no way in hell they're going to be pulling or rampage tanks. Now, our offensive discs aren't nearly as good as a warriors, so I guess it's not really a big deal if a monk goes a whole night without using /disc once, but the principle is still the same.

Along the same line of reasoning, I continue to be amazed by the number of tanks who don't make an effort to move behind the mob. Again, I think it comes from that ingrained "center of attention" thing that defensive only emphasized, that makes plate melee feel like they need to be right in the face of the mob. /shrug

I'm certainly not an expert on warrior disciplines and I'm not going to make any claims that warriors do the same dmg as monks. I do feel confident though that *many* warriors really gimp themselves in both their choices of /disc and gear when it comes to raiding and soloing. If you are not one of the top few warriors in your guild, you don't need to be so hung up on aggro all the time. Get a damaging weapon and use it when you're standing behind the mob like all the rest of us. I see warriors all the time who are so hung up on finding an aggro/hate proccing weapon that they give up a great deal in dps because they refuse to use weapons with no proc or low aggro damage procs. When you aren't going to be using defensive, try using an offensive discipline. When you want to solo, get a freaking fungi like every other high level melee that wants to solo and use your invigorate bp for downtime, or better yet try to use some bandages.

You see, for a long time, monks have been gearing themselves for both roles and we could alternate between them. When I'm pulling, my dps is the furthest thing from my mind. I'm using a shield. I'm loaded up on ac/hp gear and I'm getting all the ac/hp/regen buffs I can get. When I'm just one of the pack on the ass of the mob, I switch out some gear and beg for atk buffs and attempt to max out my damage. That being said, no monk in our guild ever tanks, period, unless people are dead. If more warriors would try to be more adaptable and not have tunnel vision when it comes to defensive, defensive, defensive, I think they could do a much better job at making themselves happy.

</p>

Pokiri

10-25-2002, 01:12 PM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>

Yes monks, warriors have some of the worst DPS in the game, why, because a tank knows hes not there to do damage, he equips himself to hold aggro any way he can, this means aggro procs (Slows, stuns, dots, debuffs, Enraging blow), usually at the cost of DPS,

<hr></blockquote>

... and conversely, if a warrior equips themselves for damage, they get very close to monk DPS, especially pre-ST/NToV. I've got parses that show it with different weapons, if I can get my spouse to go that last level to 60 I'll show you how close a 60 warrior gets to a 61 monk with the same weapon (like oh, tae ew war maul, amy staff, or shovel) and haste item.

As for offensive discs, warriors have much better discs than monks do. We have innerflame (4x bonus 12s/26 min), hundredfists (~30% haste 15s/27min) and the pathetic discs of thunderkick (single kick/3.5 min), silentfist (single strike/6 min) and ashenhand (single strike/71 min).

Warriors have charge (no miss 14 sec/23 min), mighty strike (crits 10s/54 min), precision (3 min/27 min), fell strike (4x bonus 12s/28 min), and aggressive (3 min/27min). Notice, all discs last LONGER. Like enough to actually affect DPS. Both aggressive and precision are good discs, and would be used a heck of a lot if monks had them. If you hadn't noticed, we already tank like rangers at the 60 and <20aa point, so we'd certainly use them.

There's no denying that monks do great damage at the highest levels (post-primal especially), but to overlook that monks need help at the middle levels just isn't fair. We're not hybrids of rogues and warriors, for god's sake, we should have a clear role - either pulling, or damage, and we should be GOOD at them. The mitigation nerf has severely impacted the pulling role, and the pre-primal damage is way too close to warriors for anyone to call it balanced.

</p>

10-25-2002, 01:25 PM

Has nothing to do with this. I also never claimed to be a monk expert, though I do have one semi-twink sitting around for when I'm bored (she's mostly naked under that blue robe, gasp!). I DO have 61 levels of expertise as a warrior however, starting pre-kunark. I know when I'm out-classed in any aspect of what I do. And the only time we come closer to doing monk damage, using this discipline, we take a large defensive hit.

I am terribly sorry if I came off as an ill mannered troll, I do keep my posts civil... plus I think we dark elves look much better than those swamp beasts. ;)

In the intrests of putting this thread back on its rails, I would like to offer what I see. I see monks still pulling effectively when FD is needed to split. I still see monks dealing great damage in a fight. I've even seen monks tanking rampage post-nerf. Soloing is not your, or anyone's role really. It's just what to do if you can't find a group. And I still see a large number of monks running around the same exp areas, soloing.

Please try to remember this: Soloing is not a role. (this is not directed at anyone in paticular)

Wychway Darkmink

61 Warlord, Bristlebane

</p>

10-25-2002, 01:33 PM

No warrior worth their salt is going to blow an offensive disc if they are anywhere on the MA list & the mob is not very low in health. Having said that, some warrior is probably going to come here & say how they use aggressive on every fight. Well, good for you. No good warriors I know do.

I use one maybe two discs ever. Normally I save my disc for defensive becuause I am generally the MA or SA. If I think it is going to be a fast Trak style fight I'll use fellstrike, or if the mob is 1 or 2 pct health & the MA is doing fine. The one time I tried using aggressive I got my ass handed to me because I generated too much agro.

As for weapons, I use my wavecrasher/frostbringer in 99% of all fights. Even when I am not MA I have to stay high on the agro list in order to quickly take over should the MA die (I don't yet have AE taunt). Also, for rampaging mobs, I like to stay high on the hate list so I eat the rampages instead of the clerics.

Positioning: We wall just about everything. In order to keep the MA from having to continually flip the mob, we position a fair number of plate class melees in front of the mob. That means eating a few ripostes. If a warrior is aggressive & eats what would normally be a 900 dmg riposte its going to be more like 1300. That means not only are you a mana sponge, you will die if you are already low on health.

A warrior's role is almost never DPS, so making arguments about them passing monks as melee DPS is foolish.

Baron Draxus Diablus (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=6347)

Teir'Dal Warlord

In your spare time you may study the word of god, and my god says this: Get a sword, get on a horse, and go out and kill anyone who does not like you.</p>

Varaho1

10-25-2002, 01:38 PM

Think how hard it is to keep aggro off of a monk doing a monks DPS. Not to hard really, if they use FD, although the monk will get a few love taps now and then.

Now think how hard it would be to keep aggro off of a warrior doing a monks DPS. Well no aggro lowering skills for the warrior to use. Only things they can do is turn attack off for long periods of time and grab some chanter spell, and then they will still get hit as well.

So why should a warrior worry about getting hit? Aren't they suppose to want aggro anyway? Lets take a mob you are fighting and let it hit for and additional 40% , not just max hit 40% more often, but every hit doing 40% more damage than normal. How fast you would die under that condition when you cannot FD, evade or jolt, and you are unable use a /disc for another 25 minutes?

And people wonder why /disc aggressive is not used.

</p>

10-25-2002, 01:57 PM

Not arguing. Asking...

Draxus, as I said, any warrior who is likely to tank would be foolish to blow a disc on anything but defensive. You still didn't explain what the other 8 warriors on your raid are thinking though. I think though that what you imply is just what I referred to as the self imposed albatross around your collective necks. It seems *all* warriors, not just the MA or SA, seem to think that the spotlight is suddenly going to swing around to them as the 9th tank and they're going to need defensive.

I am perfectly willing to acknowledge that warrior taunt is lacking a bit of oomph, but do you really think it's necessary to keep a bunch of tanks in front of the mob? If the true goal is to avoid the mob turning back and forth, I would think the monks doing insane dps would be placed shoulder to shoulder with the MA since they're so much more likely to draw aggro and flip the mob.

If warriors and knights really do have such crappy dps (melee or otherwise), wouldn't it be largely irrelevant where they stood since they can't draw aggro off a monk anyway without using taunt? Ahh. But perhaps, just perhaps, it's the warriors who refuse to put away their aggro generating weapons in a situation where they *don't* want aggro that are making the mob flip. So, tell the rest of your tank squad to put away the wavecrasher and the frosty in that situation and whip out some superior primary hand damage weapons like Ornate Sword of the General, CBoL or Seb Croaking Dirk. All of which are comparably priced or cheaper or easily done by a reasonable near 60's guild Hell, that 44/44 Savage Axe of Dismay seems pretty nice or the Rubicite Staff. Both fairly cheap and not likely to flip the mob.

Honestly, I'd like to understand why everyone should worry about aggro except the non-MT plate classes? Sounds to me like they're just lazy. Too lazy to switch to a more damaging combo. Too lazy to switch to non aggro weapons. Too lazy to move behind the mob. Too lazy to use any discipline other than defensive. Clearly, this wouldn't apply to you since you are your guild's MA, but what about the rest of them?

If I'm missing something here, please clear it up for me. I'd really like to know so that I don't sit there watching tanks hammer away at the front of the mob and scratching my head wondering why they aren't playing smart and moving with the rest of us as the MA positions.

</p>

Pokiri

10-25-2002, 03:43 PM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>

Soloing is not a role.

<hr></blockquote>

Quite correct... but neither is pulling without tanking. When you pull, you are in a lot of cases solo tanking it for 10-30 seconds. Okay, so monks can't solo, but the mitigation change definitely impacted pulling.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>

I see monks still pulling effectively when FD is needed to split.

<hr></blockquote>

No offense, but right now there is no riskier role than the monk pulling. Just imagine a druid with FD pulling, and you'll get what I mean. I'm not sure how long my pulling will last, I'll probably switch to my SK for that - which I don't want to do because my monk's my baby, the character I've played for 3+ years. Also, you really don't need FD pulling in a lot of situations that people do it in, you just need knowledge of pathing/aggro and a few tricks - which is another reason why SKs are going to dominate pulling. When one stun/failed FD means death, it's just not viable.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>

No warrior worth their salt is going to blow an offensive disc if they are anywhere on the MA list & the mob is not very low in health. Having said that, some warrior is probably going to come here & say how they use aggressive on every fight. Well, good for you. No good warriors I know do.

<hr></blockquote>

Well duh <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/smile.gif ALT=":)"> On the other hand, I hope that a raid with 12 warriors (this has happened in my guild) will include a few that use offensive discs and weapons.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>

If a warrior is aggressive & eats what would normally be a 900 dmg riposte its going to be more like 1300. That means not only are you a mana sponge, you will die if you are already low on health.

<hr></blockquote>

That's what the monk world looks like at the moment. See what the problem is? Unless you have 4000+ unbuffed HPs, not the 2700-ish most 60 monks have, you can't take a hit for 900-ish - because you die by ripostes/low health aggro before you can FD. Monks with that kind of gear are basically permanently aggressive warriors.

</p>

10-25-2002, 04:10 PM

I have to wonder that too. Get behind the damned thing you momos! Not only do we do more damage there, we take a little less premature damage too. Clerics hate nothing more than when a tank's turn comes and he's already down 40% from taking riposte. They generally end up a splat fast.

For the record, I spend enough time behind a mob to feel like a rogue if I'm not tanking or taking rampage and I have a nice DPS 2hander. Fungal + regrowth take care of the occasional 'oops' in aggro (which I often survive) and most AE damage. ... I should probably post this on our own board. ;)

The reasoning behind not using an offensive discipline is the 'rule' that you will need to use a defensive disc about half way or so through the recycle time and end up becomming a splat because it was not available. I swear, VI has this hard-coded in there somewhere. :D

Wychway Darkmink

61 Warlord on Bristlebane

manual sigs suck

</p>

10-25-2002, 04:44 PM

"Compare monk WEAPON SKILL CAPS to warrior SKILL CAPS pre-50.

Monks are higher."

Monk and Warrior weapon skill caps are identical until Level 43.

"Compare monk weapons commonly available pre-50 to warriors commonly available pre-50. Monks are comprable or slightly better."

Not on my server. On my server, Monk weapon prices are jacked ridiculously high, while a Warrior can get a weapon for 500pp that will get you to Level 60.

"Pre-50s, the higher atk rating and the higher weapon skills put monk damage above warrior."

Warriors start with higher Offense skill caps (though Monks eventually do catch up, and surpass Warriors at Level 40). Furthermore, almost all Warrior races start with higher STR. Consequently, Warriors have higher ATK ratings until the mid 40s. They also have Critical Hits.

Monks on the other hand have better special attacks at Level 5+, and higher caps on Dual Wield at all levels.

In the final analysis, Warriors and Monks have comparable damage output until the mid 40s. After that, Monks finally begin to outdamage Warriors.

</p>

10-25-2002, 08:33 PM

What is with all the If's and the coulds.

so you mostly are all sure about warriors doing monk damage at any level, parse it and prove it. K its hard to parse a lvl 40 monk V a lvl 40 warrior, but look at reality. do a /who all 40, then do a /who all 60. notice the difference.

<hr /><div style="text-align:center"><span style="color:red;">Veteran Galkoratikalamp Grasulerminorlalamp (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=37723)</span></div>

<div style="text-align:center"><span style="color:blue;"> Proud Warlord of The Silent Watch</span></div>
Favourite quote: "Every time you dont taunt.... A mob kills a ranger.

Please, think of the rangers."

</p>

10-25-2002, 10:40 PM

Greetings all ...!

I just sat here and read 80 minutes of mostly bullshit...!

It all comes down to this... Varent is inept and choose the least likly scenario of nerfing a Monk instead of just adding weight to items.

My lvl 55 Monk fighting Light Blue (lvl 3<img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/glasses.gif ALT="8)"> Lava Beetles use to get hit in the 30's, 40's and occasinal 50's. And win out with 90% life remaining.

Today I got hit for 80's, 90's and 101 & 102 dmg. I was left with exactly 50% life......!

I have lost approx 40% of my melee ability in small group situations... and i have a Quest cloak with AC+15

NOT THE UBER AC+60 legs that Verant thinks EVERy monk is wearing.

The made a nerf cause they didnt like what 10% of the Monks were doing and hurt ALL of them but the top 5%...

</p>

Fopoodzo

10-26-2002, 05:48 AM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>

Player* * * * Damage* * * * DPS

Rogue* * * * 99,368* * * * 69.83

Rogue* * * * 90,013* * * * 64.71

Rogue* * * * 85,917* * * * 60.38

Paladin* * * * 69,604* * * * 49.40 Greater Akheva Bane

Warrior* * * * 45,053* * * * 49.13

Monk* * * * 63,923* * * * 46.12

Monk* * * * 56,407* * * * 44.80

Ranger* * * * 56,545* * * * 44.28

Ranger* * * * 61,702* * * * 44.04

Ranger* * * * 62,256* * * * 43.75

Warrior* * * * 52,330* * * * 36.85 Main Tank

Warrior* * * * 11,172* * * * 35.13

Paladin* * * * 48,315* * * * 34.58

Paladin* * * * 48,770* * * * 34.37

ShadowK* * * * 46,480* * * * 32.78

Paladin* * * * 40,413* * * * 29.43

Warrior* * * * 39,771* * * * 28.05

Bard* * * * 39,770* * * * 27.97

Warrior* * * * 38,612* * * * 27.17 Rampage Tank

Bard* * * * 35,068* * * * 26.03

Bard* * * * 5,932* * * * 23.17

Bard* * * * 30,317* * * * 21.32

Beastlord 19,780 15.22

<hr></blockquote>

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>

This is from fighting the Itraer Vius a long time ago. I think rogues all had primal and monks had primal+. Warriors had assorted weapons. They get so damn many. heh

Monk 55.5

Monk 55.3

Monk 62.7

Rogue 85.4

Rogue 80.2

Rogue 80.2

Warrior 46.2

Warrior 41.6

Warrior 42.2

Another IV fight. Some upgrades lots of tunare daggers.

Monk 54.8

Monk 59.8

Monk 59.5

Rogue 92.6

Rogue 92.3

Rogue 84.2

Warrior 45.4

Warrior 48.7

Warrior 44.2

<hr></blockquote>

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>

Monk 51.549 78.8 ( Fangs + Prismatic )

Monk 47.684 73.3 ( Gharns + GMU ? )

Monk 47.498 72.4 ( thats me, using a Caens )

Rogue 42.291 66.4 ( Tendonslicer + Primal )

Monk 43.191 65.8

Ranger 41.392 64.5

Monk 40.228 63.1 ( Fangs + Fist of Mithril )

Rogue 39.438 61.0

Monk 39.130 60.2

Rogue 37.245 59.6

Warrior 38.556 59.5

Ranger 37.070 58.8 ( Claw of Vyz'Drah + Primal )

Monk 37.016 58.4

Monk 37.032 58.2

Rogue 36.778 56.4

Ranger 35.791 55.1 ( Claw of Vyz'Drah + Vyz'Drahs Render of Souls )

Ranger 33.829 53.1

Beastlord+warder 34.038 52.6

Warrior 25.199 52.5 ( joined the fight 3 minutes late )

SK 31.897 51.3 ( Emp 2hs )

Paladin 29.217 49.7

Paladin 24.961 39.06

Monk 23.395 37.4

Warrior 24.315 36.5 ( Maintank, BF + BoC? )

SK 23.586 36.2 ( Blindfoe )

Mageepicpet 10.487 34.8 ( joined late )

Warrior 22.656 34.6 ( Rampagetank )

SK 19.167 33.3

Mageepicpet 20.230 32.9

Spectrepet 11.053 23.17 ( joined late )

Spectrepet 13.420 20.9

<hr></blockquote>

pub35.ezboard.com/fmonkly...=419.topic (http://pub35.ezboard.com/fmonklybusiness43508frm17.showMessage?topicID=419. topic)

Warriors aren't out damaging monks (there are a few exceptional..erm.. exceptions - about as many as monks out tanking warriors pre-nerf ironically enough. <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/smile.gif ALT=":)"> )

BUT, with the mitigation nerf they are closer to monks in damage than they should be (relative to monk current LACK of defence), or perhaps monks are further away from rogues in damage than they should be.

Simple solutions would be, increase monk avoidance and leave damage alone, or increase monk damage a bit, or undo mitigation nref and give warriors a mitigation bonus.

</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/bmonklybusiness43508.showUserPublicProfile?gid=fop oodzo@monklybusiness43508>Fopoodzo</A> at: 10/26/02 1:56:20 am

10-26-2002, 11:54 AM

Thanks Fopoodzo.

<hr />
<div>
Xarnak "Death to all fanatics" Clawfist (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=266873), Iksar Monk of Xev.
</div>
<div>
Dubious member of Hawkestone (http://pub72.ezboard.com/bhawkestone).
</div>

<div>

"I stare, it stares back.

I long to know its feelings.

It demurs. Lunch, then."

</div></p>

10-27-2002, 10:50 AM

Fopoodzo:

check out the logs you posted there. Namely the 2nd and 3rd. The first one seems a bit jaded to me; as I've seen about 20-30 log parses and that is the only one showing such a small disodence between warrior and monk damage output.

Just to add some flavor, here is my own parse, from Statue about 1 week ago:

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>"

Alnaron 16287 62.85 (warrior: TSBS + in bard and necro group so higher ATK/haste + was aggressive the whole fight)

Alundis 21439 84.41 (rogue)

Amaddar 11096 43.86 (warrior: Kreizenn's Flame/DtD whip)

Anjulie 6292 26.11 (bard)

Artaxerxes 14454 53.39 (paladin: primal)

Ealdyine 2 -- (cleric)

Gusiam 11168 43.12 (warrior: TSBS or primal 1hs/15:20 off rhag 2. When tanking: BoC/Hategiver)

Hyred 22484 87.15 (rogue)

Iiluvyen 13076 51.48 (ranger; no bow)

Jasarn 9713 39.97 (epic pet)

Karantik 8499 35.27 (epic pet)

Kinekor 219 1.70 (cleric)

Minizoro 19397 76.37 (rogue)

Oleciana 4638 18.40 (bard)

Qanya 1 -- (cleric)

Raluwen 21323 88.11 (rogue)

Reyem 14083 54.80 (warrior; Bonechiller/Keen-Edged cleaver: in bard group, can't remember if aggressive: primal)

Sarkar 15916 69.81 (monk: primal/fist of ligtning)

Sergeant tellsren 18489 71.66 (DC pet)

Tealaan 12625 49.70 (ranger; no bow)

Statue of rallos zek 50154 193.64

Tourment 3129 13.09 (not sure here)

Valnir 6774 41.01 (warrior; MT; BoC/Kreizenn's, primal)

Zore 9208 39.02 (monk; no primal + rez effects)

Zyzz 24196 94.15 (rogue)

"<hr></blockquote>

namely, let's focus on the warrior rogue comparison. I will leave zore out because he was not fully buffed, did not have primal, and had rez effects for most of the fight because he died pulling.

so, the comparison is,:

Sarkar 15916 69.81 (monk)

vs.

Gusiam 11168 43.12 (warrior)

Valnir 6774 41.01 (warrior; tank)

Amaddar 11096 43.86 (warrior)

Reyem 14083 54.80 (warrior)

Alnaron 16287 62.85 (warrior)

To keep a few things in mind. The warrior that did 62.85 DPS; alnaron. First, he's using a 2-hander, so his damage output is already significantly higher than duel-wield (esp since this is pre-PoP). He is also in the bard and necro group; meaning he has more Atk than he normally one, and higher haste. Finally, he was fighting for the full 3-minute duration with /disc aggresive. This may work for easy fights such as Statue. However, for the harder mobs out there, you don't see warriors burning their discs. So, I think it's a bit unfair to judge him in this comparison because he had extra attack boons that allowed him to do unusually higher damage compared to others..

So, if you look at the rest of the parse, you will see that the monk does at least 15 DPS more than the highest warrior (who was in the bard group as well, so he has more atk/haste). Even here, 15.01/54.8 = 27.5%. Keep in mind the disparity of being in a bard group vs. not. I would say, to make up for the difference, it would be fair to substract about 4 DPS (at least) off the warriors damage output. So, 54.8 becomes 50.8, the difference becomes 19.01. so, 19.01/50.8 = 37.5%.

Let's look at your own logs; #2 and #3. The top half of the 2nd log features an average disparity of 14 DPS between warriors and monks. The average damage output for warriors during that fight war about 43 dps. 14/43 = 33% difference. So, monks are dealing 33% more damage here.

THe bottom half shows an average difference of 12 DPS, with average warrior damage dealt at 46 dps. something doesn't make sense to me about this damage difference, but nevertheless; 12/46 = 26% more damage dealt by monks.

Your 3rd log. Seems to only be 1 warrior you can compare in here. So, let's do a head to head:

Warrior 38.556 59.5 vs.

Monk 51.549 78.8 ( Fangs + Prismatic )

Difference here is 19.3 DPS. 19.3/59.5 = 32.5% difference.

The 4 logs, if averaged, show a difference of approximately 31% more damage dealt by monks than by warriors in a fight. So, once again, can someone PLEASE show me the 5% difference between warrior and monk damage output.

<div style="text-align:center"><span style="font-size:small;">Wilhelmm D'averam
Warlord of the Apocalypse</span>

<a href="http://

http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=46100">

Wilhelmm's Profile</a>

</div></p>

10-27-2002, 11:38 AM

I gotta say, most warriors are pretty lame about the gear they choose, and that causes a lot of their problems.

DPS : Most warriors won't even bother trying to obtain a good two-hander. At Tormax a few days ago, warriors with no two-hander wouldn't even interested in the Tormax Axe. It went to a twink (of a more intelligent player). Yet this axe does great DPS. We use a DKP system, and the warriors have have high totals -- they've been spending 30ish points on HP items. Yet, they wouldn't spend a single point on the axe. FYI, 1 DKP point in our guild you can earn in under an hour.

Haste : We killed Eashen two days ago. Three Claws dropped. 14/18 with 41% haste. We had to beat the crap out of the warriors in /gu before they'd bid the minimum points for the claw (3 points -- about 3 or 4 hours worth of raiding). Mind you, these are warriors some of whom have FBSS level haste and they wouldn't take the item because it had no HP. Friends, can we say "dumb-ass"? Knew you could.

Soloing : Warriors don't bother with regen gear -- yet regen gear is the heart and soul of soloing.

Everywhere I go, I see the same thing : Warriors who think one stat is god, and put all their gear into that stat. Then they whine about how weak they are, that they can't do their job.

And Verant listens to these dumb-asses. Sad.

Grazel Nukite, Grandmaster

Triage Quadbypass, Vicar of 60 Blueberries

Valiant Elite, Druzzil Ro

</p>

Varaho1

10-27-2002, 02:17 PM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>We had to beat the crap out of the warriors in /gu before they'd bid the minimum points for the claw <hr></blockquote>

<span style="color:red;"> So as in most guilds with DKP, you make your warriors spend DKP on items the guild forces them to have and then wonder why they have crap?

And just pray-tell how is one going to use a 2hd weapon effectively when their haste is from an offhand weapon?</span>

</p>

10-27-2002, 04:46 PM

Wilhelmm D'averam Said

The 4 logs, if averaged, show a difference of approximately 31% more damage dealt by monks than by warriors in a fight. So, once again, can someone PLEASE show me the 5% difference between warrior and monk damage output.

the actual parse with the warrior with agressive should count he opted to chose to use his disc to do more dmg just as i am almost 95% positive that the monks and rogues in them parse used there offensive disc to. so what it comes down to is with warrior's playing smart and useing there offenseive disc there is no 15dps. the other monk with res effect's should also count into the equation to. them are fight situation's no one in the fight should be excluded.your trying to exclude the warrior who used his offensive disc becuse it proves there is smart warrior's who know how to do dps.

</p>

Varaho1

10-27-2002, 05:36 PM

<span style="color:red;"> I belive you missed the part where the warrior was using a /disc, additional atk buffs, "the bard song advantage" and still could not match the monks DPS.

The gap between them would have been quite a bit larger if the monk was smart enough to be trying for max DPS by being in the same group.</span>

</p>

10-27-2002, 06:16 PM

Quit the coloured text, you're not special and different, and making what you say red doesn't make it any more important.

<hr />
<div>
Xarnak "Death to all fanatics" Clawfist (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=266873), Iksar Monk of Xev.
</div>
<div>
Dubious member of Hawkestone (http://pub72.ezboard.com/bhawkestone).
</div>

<div>

"I stare, it stares back.

I long to know its feelings.

It demurs. Lunch, then."

</div></p>

10-27-2002, 08:51 PM

I don't know what your guild policy is but ours is that the raid leader or his designated representative assigns groups. You do not choose your group. I'm sure there was a reason why the warior was but with the bard and not a rogue. Rangers and rogues are put with the bards when I have been on raids and the bards are being used to boost DPS. I have never been put into a DPS group yet. Of course many times bards are not even playing haste songs and are playing resist and mana seive songs instead.

However, I do not feel the real question is whether warriors or monks do more damage or even how much more damage monks do. The real question is why monks do not do as much damage as rogues or AA rangers since those 2 classes have as much utility as monks and are as good as or better defense now? And yes, I know their damage is situational. I'm all for the improvements to monk damage coming as situational damage similar to a rogue or ranger's. It's not hard, just add critical kicks from the rear or add throwing items (at similar cost and availability to ranger arrows) and AA's that allow a monk to match a ranger's bow capabilities.

The other issue is that Verant has fundamentally changed our class for the majority of non ubber/super twink monks. I have many hours invested in my character and I can no longer play him efectively with the changes. I chose the monk because he was a melee that could solo to some extent, not nearly as well as most casters or hybrids though. My lifestyle requires this since grouping at 50+ requires setting aside fairly large (2-4 hour) blocks of time. In most zones on Karana you are lucky to even get into a group in less than 2 hours. I rarely get this much time to play. On guild raids or in guild groups I can go AFK and they understand but normal groups get very upset when you ask to go afk for 15 minutes to an hour and will not hold your spot til you get back.

Clawr 54th Monk

Inspect Me (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=364988&resize=true)

Bomar 54th Druid

Clan of Unity

Karana Server

</p>

10-27-2002, 09:19 PM

<span style="color:gold;"> The red text doesnt, nor does this colour. Get used to it.</span>

<hr /><div style="text-align:center"><span style="color:red;">Veteran Galkoratikalamp Grasulerminorlalamp (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=37723)</span></div>

<div style="text-align:center"><span style="color:blue;"> Proud Warlord of The Silent Watch</span></div>
Favourite quote: "Every time you dont taunt.... A mob kills a ranger.

Please, think of the rangers."

</p>

10-27-2002, 09:29 PM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Everywhere I go, I see the same thing : Warriors who think one stat is god, and put all their gear into that stat. Then they whine about how weak they are, that they can't do their job.

<hr></blockquote>

Our role is to tank, a lot of the time we do. So we invest in items that help us do this. Simple isnt it.

Doing dps is a not so important role. If we were never made to tank, then we wouldnt need to 'think one stat is god' assuming HP.

Besides, alot of warriors try for ATK more then you think

</p>

Pokiri

10-27-2002, 09:39 PM

Question, was the warrior with the TSBS avatar/primal or not? Gotta compare apples to apples, full offensive monk (innerflame AND best offensive weapons/buffs) vs. full offensive warrior (aggressive AND best offensive weapons/buffs).

In spite of NToV/ST weapons, the full offensive warrior got really close to the (presumably) full offensive monk. I bet you if the monk was using a tstaff/SSHS and warrior using amy staff/RBB (i.e., stuff you can buy in the bazaar) you'd have very much closer results. I'm planning on testing a 60 warrior against 61 monk with the same haste and weapon, but it has to wait until my spouse hits 60.

It's not an across-the-board complaint, I don't think - but then, I didn't think the complaint about monks tanking was across-the-board either. Adding a few monk primary-hand 1h weapons between 12/20 and 15/20, and a few monk 2h weapons between 29/30 and 40/30 would go a long way towards solving the problem I've been talking about - but I suspect that there's a bit more as well along the same lines that's probably needed.

I dunno about everyone else, but I'm getting used to my reduced tanking role - there's quite a few places when I would have pulled before, but druid/ranger/SK do it now. Feign splitting is very situational, and given the outdoor planes, isn't needed very much. If I make any mistake and the mob breathes on me, I'm dead - so it isn't worth my doing it anymore, for the most part.

It's relaxing. I'm on vacation <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/smile.gif ALT=":)"> And it's way too amusing when I realize how much easier it is when you don't lose xp on raids. Maybe I'll bring on my SK to pull some days, but I'd rather see the SK mains do it instead, so I can sit back and do damage instead. Amazing how much fun that evade key is when nobody expects you to tank anymore <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/smile.gif ALT=":)">

</p>

10-27-2002, 11:50 PM

Yea. the TSBS warrior had primal; sorry. forgot to mention this.

Leo>

Like I mentioned before. In a fight like statue, loosing tanks isn't a big deal. However, on tougher mobs, warriors are TOLD to save defensive instead of burning their discs on offense. Why; because with important mobs; tanks die quickly. One mis-timed or lagged cheal means death to a warrior on AoW. One unfortunate (landed) charm on the MT and you're screwed out of a tank. AoW/Burrower turn and warrior too laggy to turn atk off in time; dead tank.

When you're talking about the high-end mobs, warriors don't burn their offensive disc because you never know whose gonna LD, or when you suddenly need to tank. And BELIEVE me, if a warrior is called to tank and he's burned his disc on offensive; he will be in deep shit. Oh, and if/when he has to tank and he's in aggressive mode; which means he's taking about 2x the damage he normally tanks; he's even more fucked.

Also, keep in this in mind. A Tier 7 guild (based on pre-PoP standings) can 1-tank statue (tier 3) with a ranger probably. A tier 2 or 3 guild meanwhile will struggle with him; still not allowing their tanks to burn their discs. Bottom line, warriors in guild will usually not burn their discs on mobs at their tier level and maybe even 1 lower than their level. Hence, their damage will always stay significantly below monks

And, let's face it, these are really the situations where warriors are really the "required" tank. I mean, let's face it, in a guild full of VT items, their local ranger can probably tank a mob like Tormax pretty easily. In this type of scenario, warriors aren't really necessary either because their superior tanking ability is unnecessary. So there's no reason to have a a warrior at this raid (you do need an Fd puller though). Just overload the raid with rogues and have a hybrid tank it (considering how much better they can hold agro).

As for placing people in certain groups. Warriors are placed in a bard group for a reason; on important mobs. Especially on riposte mobs. Why? Simple; you need the warrior to gain agro QUICKLY; something that is done through increased haste and atk buffs (given by; you guessed it, bards/SK/Necro). You also need the warrior to have maximum Damage Shield; for obvious reasons.

In both cases, the bard has to be in the group for warriors to get these boosts. Believe me, having a warrior gain agro as quick as possible is always good; especially on riposte mobs (I mean; mob turns. if someone doesn't turn off attack; and they hit AoW 6 times, they die to riposte. If other people die too; same shit. Increasing a tank's ability to agro and increasing that tank's DS is far more important putting the bard into another group). So, depending on the number of bards the raid has (which is often a small amount as bards aren't very popular class); chances are; warriors/tanks are placed in the bard group for an "uber" encounter.

Concerning the addition of weapons. The 2-handed category I'm pretty sure warriors get an edge in selection. The monk selection of 1-hand weapons seems to be plentiful though. I can see 9 hand-to-hand items alone that a monk can use with a 15/20 damage/delay or better. And this is actually incomplete because the list is missing at least Fist of Lightning, Fists of Acrylia and glowing fists of acrylia. and Primal/Priceless are not considered hand-to-hand and neither is the 16/19 off Vulak.

Also, keep in mind, a warrior cannot use Bloodfrenzy/boC/HG for damage purposes while not tanking because it draws unnecesary agro. And, Warriors need to get those 3 items along with damage weapons because they are VERY necessary for agro-control. So, consider that warriors have to get two types of weapons; tanking and damage ones; while monks only need to get damage weapons. So, in terms of 1-handers, I think monks come out just fine; at least as good as, if not better than warriors.

I will attest to the fact that prior to the NToV tier; monks are a bit handicapped in terms of weapons. However, the main problem is monk itemization beginning at the NToV/ST level; around tier 4. Around this level is when monks really begin to excel in damage beyond warriors.

If you wanna do a head-to-head parse of monk vs. warrior; do a separate one for low-tier characters and higher-end ones. Unfortunately, there is truth in the statement that monks not in the high-end game do suffer unfairly, and it would be nice if you could affect just the higher-end game somehow. However, this would require a HUGE re-itemization and re-structure of gear from tier 3 and above. Because this would require a very large amount of labor, it is easier (less fair but easier) to nerf the whole class; under the assumption that more and more people will reach the level when monks begin to excel (which is not an entirely incorrect assumption)

<div style="text-align:center"><span style="font-size:small;">Wilhelmm D'averam
Warlord of the Apocalypse</span>

<a href="http://

http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=46100">

Wilhelmm's Profile</a>

</div></p>

Wubao

10-27-2002, 11:59 PM

"When you're talking about the high-end mobs, warriors don't burn their offensive disc because you never know whose gonna LD, or when you suddenly need to tank. And BELIEVE me, if a warrior is called to tank and he's burned his disc on offensive; he will be in deep shit. Oh, and if/when he has to tank and he's in aggressive mode; which means he's taking about 2x the damage he normally tanks; he's even more fucked."

Question ... mainly cause I'm curious about the various uses for this ... you guys thought of trying SHIELD in any situations like this? Could it work, or help out? Would it work or help out?

Like I said, just curious to see what some of the applications for /shield can be.

"Also, keep in this in mind. A Tier 7 guild (based on pre-PoP standings)"

Can't resist this wisecrack: Is that ranking according to the AP poll or the USA Today poll?

:P

Wu

</p>

Fopoodzo

10-28-2002, 06:21 AM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Unfortunately, there is truth in the statement that monks not in the high-end game do suffer unfairly, and it would be nice if you could affect just the higher-end game somehow. However, this would require a HUGE re-itemization and re-structure of gear from tier 3 and above. Because this would require a very large amount of labor, it is easier (less fair but easier) to nerf the whole class; under the assumption that more and more people will reach the level when monks begin to excel (which is not an entirely incorrect assumption) <hr></blockquote>

Well post nerf they <span style="text-decoration:underline">could</span> slightly adjust the damage tables. Increasing monk L1-50 ones slight to offset the extra damage taken, then adjust the higher ones accordingly, or not depending on the damage situation. (afraid I don't know if everyone stays on thier L60 damage tables post-60 or if they've implimented higher ones.)

This is pretty much what monks need, to be looked a throughly.

The nerf hit every aspect of... um.. monking <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/smile.gif ALT=":)"> , and after such a nerf to something so integral to a melee class as mitigation, monks need 2 things.

1. some sort of statement from Verant - this total deafening silence is not only unwarrented, but frankly insulting.

2. a complete look at monks balance compared to pure melee's and hybrids post nerf, by VI.

Personally I don't see how either is too much to ask for considering what they changed and the far reaching effects of that mitigation change in the nerf.

</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/bmonklybusiness43508.showUserPublicProfile?gid=fop oodzo@monklybusiness43508>Fopoodzo</A> at: 10/28/02 10:06:09 am

Fopoodzo

10-28-2002, 06:23 AM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>dunno about everyone else, but I'm getting used to my reduced tanking role - there's quite a few places when I would have pulled before, but druid/ranger/SK do it now. Feign splitting is very situational, and given the outdoor planes, isn't needed very much. If I make any mistake and the mob breathes on me, I'm dead - so it isn't worth my doing it anymore, for the most part<hr></blockquote>

I think that is the crux of this thread - what is a monks role post nerf?

</p>

10-28-2002, 08:08 AM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>

what is a monks role post nerf?

<hr></blockquote>

Rogue-lite.

<hr />
<div>
Xarnak "Death to all fanatics" Clawfist (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=266873), Iksar Monk of Xev.
</div>
<div>
Dubious member of Hawkestone (http://pub72.ezboard.com/bhawkestone).
</div>

<div>

"I stare, it stares back.

I long to know its feelings.

It demurs. Lunch, then."

</div></p>

10-28-2002, 10:09 AM

yes but the fact is that warriors can close the gap in dps considerably wether they chose to or not don't matter. that 01% that dose shows the imbalence. just as the top 01% of monks who could tank some mobs better then a warrior. monks tanking better then warrior's was purely situational just as a warrior poping agressive is. i never seen a monk MT AoW or emperor them mobs need warrior's to tank. there is situation's where pally's and sk's are ment to tank and in them situations they tank better then warrior's to but is that unbalenced? the whole game is base on situation's where some classes exceed the other classes in some cases.

</p>

10-28-2002, 05:20 PM

8 pages so far and no comment from the EQ team. Maybe we should throw this on the Druids Grove site and see if it gets read by anyone on the Dev team? Myabe title it "druids on strike' or somethin...

Foulsbane 60 cleric Mith Marr

</p>

Fopoodzo

10-28-2002, 06:41 PM

I have to say the complete lack of comment, especially given the comments and feedback on all the other nerfs, is pretty insulting.

Either they really don't care - which I don't believe.

Or I guess they don't know what to say - which would lead me to believe they know they've messed up more things than they've fixed with the nerf and can't defend or even justify it.

</p>

10-28-2002, 07:07 PM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>

Or I guess they don't know what to say - which would lead me to believe they know they've messed up more things than they've fixed with the nerf and can't defend or even justify it.

<hr></blockquote>

On the button... somebody is sat at VI simply saying "oh fuck".

<hr />
<div>
Xarnak "Death to all fanatics" Clawfist (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=266873), Iksar Monk of Xev.
</div>
<div>
Dubious member of Hawkestone (http://pub72.ezboard.com/bhawkestone).
</div>

<div>

"I stare, it stares back.

I long to know its feelings.

It demurs. Lunch, then."

</div></p>

10-28-2002, 07:12 PM

I think that the monk role is easy to define post-nerf.

POP has made slowing a requirement for groups. POP has also make grouping a requirement. POP MOBs have 32K to 100K of HP.

In a group you have the following with POP:

1. Warrior

2. Cleric

3. Enchanter

4. Shammy (must have for slows because enchanter is busy with mez)

5. Rogue (must do lots of melee damage for high HP MOBs in POP)

6. ?

It appears that position 6 is either Mage (super damage plus pet) or Wizard (super damage) or Ranger (next in melee damage after Rogue and tanks better than Monk) or Druid (good CH to help heal warrior/enchanter/rogue).

Druid harmony was removed so that pulling would require crowd control in all zones.

Monk FD pulling was removed so that solo pulling out of camps would be more difficult if not impossible. Removing Monk FD pulling was accomplished by reducing Monk AC and increasing damage Monks take from behind.

-Fysts (average gear on a 57 human monk)

</p>

Fopoodzo

10-29-2002, 10:29 AM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>6. ?

It appears that position 6 is either Mage (super damage plus pet) or Wizard (super damage) or Ranger (next in melee damage after Rogue and tanks better than Monk) or Druid (good CH to help heal warrior/enchanter/rogue).<hr></blockquote>

Sad but true, group-wise a monks worth is probably at an all time low.

(which wouldn't be so bad if they'd not nerfed soloing along with everything else.)

</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/bmonklybusiness43508.showUserPublicProfile?gid=fop oodzo@monklybusiness43508>Fopoodzo</A> at: 10/29/02 10:41:20 am

Tiane

10-29-2002, 05:17 PM

It just makes me sad, I've no idea what role I'm supposed to have in a group now. Used to be I could tank if we couldnt find a plate tank around. Now that's not an option, so if we cant find a plate tank we just log? Great solution.

So what is the role of the monk? Terrible tank. Mediocre damage dealer. Zero group utility. Even warriors and rogues, the other pure melees, can slow via procs. (Not even gonna go into the overpowered nature of slow, and the entire new expansion that requires it for nearly every encounter.)

Dont need fd pulling since crowd control is required... I guess my ability to bandage up to 90% is good if we're low on mana... Lets see, what else to I add to a group... well I can type in trivia questions during melee! Yeah thats it!

/sigh

/FU SOE for ruining a player's gaming experience.

Tia

</p>

10-29-2002, 06:12 PM

I know that this all sucks...and certainly sucks more for the non 60, non uber equipped monk. But geez....suggesting we dont have a place in groups is taking it a bit far.

Quite correctly it's been pointed out that stuff in POP hits REAL HARD and requires slow. But the assertion that you *must* have crowd control is silly. I'll take a good shammy who can slow a two or three mobs in camp and a good tank mezz scheme *which CAN AND DOES include me so long as the mobs are slowed* any day.

My group isn't going to fail to form because we don't have an enchanter. In fact, in alot of places, with two really good tank mezzers and a good shammy I've been able to three man group and reap some hellagood exp.

I was in such a three man group in PON last night. 61 monk (me), 62 shaman, and 61 SK. We were over past the river killing those nightmare monkeywerewolf looking chimps near the rocks.

We actually got to the point where we LIKED having two mobs in camp and probably could have done three if the shammy didn't mind a little root parking fun.

I was still in fact pulling for the group. FD splitting seemed to be working just fine. So I had most of the roles that I have typically had. Sure I cannot solo nearly as well as I had in the past, I find with the nerfs that the opening sequence of a fight is more tension filled and uncertain, and yes the nerfs are still grossly unfair because of their impact on the non uber and the whole issue of the fact that verant could have accomplished their objective without hitting us so hard. But come on guys, saying to yourselves that we are ungroupfriendly is focusing energy AWAY from where it needs to be.

Focus on the overall equity of the situation. Focus on the impact, the unfairness ofit, on the nonuber. Do these things first...and at the same time raise the bar on what you are willing to try in a group situation and you'll find that you CAN be very desirable to groups and still perform the roles that you always have.

Chopstiks

61 Grandmaster

Vazaelle

Goanad

Creator of Sept 4 "The Worst Everquest Patch in History"(tm) </p>

10-29-2002, 06:29 PM

I agree with Goanad's post above me.

Yes monks can still do what they did before. It takes a lil adjustment but we can do it.

I get bent out of shape when the rest of you are whining and crying saying we don't have a role or we don't know what it is.

I know what my role is, it has not changed.

Does the nerf effect me? Ofcourse. You give me that crap about having good gear and due to it, it doesn't effect me. That's a load of crap. If you don't have the gear you can't tell me whether or not how much I have been effected. Only I know that.

My major problem is how over powered casters are. Nerfing the monk just increased the disparity between melee / hybrid and the casters. Like I stated on the petition..

They should have left the monk alone, increase minor things on the other melee hybrids (mostly warriors) and found a way to help close the ENORMOUS disparity between casters and melee/hybrids.

And please. I do not want to see another post about how the bard is broken. Jeese. Soloing dragons in WW hardly sounds even remotely broken to me.

Rhizzen Khillahpriest <Darkblood>

54 Necromancer of Innoruuk

Sol Ro

Sensai Ssoulz Jah <Darkblood>

60 Grandmaster of Cazic Thule

Sol Ro

<div style="text-align:center">

Ssoulz Stuffz (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=405138)

http://www.thedragonseye.net/eq/Sensei%20Ssoulz%20signature.jpg

</div></p>

10-30-2002, 03:01 AM

It is true that 60+ monks are still amazing. They can split pulls and not die instantly unlike lower level monks that are suddenly a HUGE, MASSIVE burden on the healers.

Goanad is discussing the high end game where the nerf has little impact. It really is the monk below 60 without any AA that is effected.

But that really isn't the problem with this change. The real problem is that VERANT CHANGED THE WAY THE CLASS IS PLAYED AFTER THREE (3) YEARS OF PLAYING IT.

Simple question: Can you identify a product that you purchased where the vendor reduced the features on that product?

It is just so completely, utterly unfair to have a character changed after 90 hours of playing it. I spent that many hours to get to level 57 and now I have to adjust because Verant f**ked up with the HIGH LEVEL AC ON TOV DROPS. Why do I have to adjust for some content designer at Verant that screwed up?

The best example is the 60 AC, 0.0 WT pants. Why can a monk wear those? What was Verant thinking when they made that item?

I am nerfed and my play style is hosed becase Verant will not nerf the UBER PLAYERS who have those items. I am also nerfed because Verant screwed up in making those items monk wearable.

The monk position in the "less than 60", "less than 40 AA", group is questionable. We just do too much damage and that draws agro which translates into too much healing which translates into too much down time for lower level average monks without uber, GODs of EQ items.

Sorry but my complaint is mostly about the change due to Verant unending lack of long term vision.

-Fysts (average gear on a nerfed 57 human monk)

</p>

10-30-2002, 03:11 AM

you got 90 hour's wow. There is many with over 8000 hour's on there monks and you feel you was slighted? the nerf sucks i don't like it but atleast you haven't spent the amount of time some have invested into there toon's to have it changed.

</p>

Fopoodzo

10-30-2002, 03:54 AM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Hi folks.

We're going to have to change this a bit with the next patch. We'll be reducing the power of the monk fist somewhat. It's just not going to work out as it is, it's just too good - the improvement is too dramatic over the level range and for the 'effort' required to get this 'weapon'.

Obviously we don't want to bring you more news like this, but this much of an improvement just wasn't intended.

Alan<hr></blockquote>

It seems monks aren't supposed to be damage dealers.

Monks aren't supposed to be tanks.

Monks aren't supposed to be damage dealers.

Ok it's simple enough to tell (from the nerfs) what monks AREN'T supposed to be.

How about VI tell us what monks ARE supposed to be.

</p>

10-30-2002, 04:30 AM

Duh...

Monks have 2 roles now. They are really easy to get into and really easy to play.

1) We sit in corner with LFG on all day.

2) We Die... ALOT.

Thanks for your time

Repeat after me

I love SOE they know all and see all... their vision is far above us mere mortals..obviously. We are not worthy.. We are not worthy...

If above does not reduce aggresion/tension take hands put to both sides of monitor. Now pull forward with hands as you throw head forward. Do this repeatedly until all anger is gone.

Drakol Dreadfist

Da Insane Monkey of the 53rd Degree and camping.

</p>

10-30-2002, 05:08 AM

Been lurking alittle, and I find notting really constructive just a bunch of whiners.

What is monks role?

Simple, same as ranger and rogues roles are DISH out damage.

As someone said, rangers only better damage if your guild can position the mob in a "good" position.

I pretty mutch do the same thing as I allways done, pull monitor, position mobs, and dish out damage.

Sometimes since my guild is a "slacker" guild and dont have many warriors I end up offtank/rampage tank shit.

Regarding the fist change, well who would sacrifice all the stats from a weapon to make you do little more damage, if even that, since Fangs/GMU combo would pretty mutch own "changed" fists.

However is it right that common monk01 can dish out close to the same damage as a raidguild monk that spends 5-6h a day raiding to attaining better gear? HELL NO.

Is it right that a monk with simular gear level of gear could mitigrate as mutch damage as a plate class and takeing less damage due to higher avoidance? Well No.

//Regards Zhaz

</p>

Fopoodzo

10-30-2002, 05:08 AM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>What is monks role?

Simple, same as ranger and rogues roles are DISH out damage.

As someone said, rangers only better damage if your guild can position the mob in a "good" position.<hr></blockquote>

To be out damaged significantly by rogues.

To be nearly out damaged by warriors (and severly out tanked by them), and by rangers (yet lacking any of their utility or massive bow damage or specific hate reduction).

Yep, that's a great role.

</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/bmonklybusiness43508.showUserPublicProfile?gid=fop oodzo@monklybusiness43508>Fopoodzo</A> at: 10/30/02 7:28:22 am

10-30-2002, 10:31 AM

So they nerf our tanking ability - fine, screws over the average player.

Then they are nerfing a great weapon that ALL 65 monks would have access to, making all the average players possible weapon of choice go back to being obsolete. - Fine, with all the aggro we'd have, we'd be back to basics of FDn to drop aggro, reducing our dps back to "normal"

So here's the questions:

1) If the average monk can't tank , why bother increasing dps? More dps = more aggro.

2) If we have more aggro, and have to fd off to reduce it, wouldn't that just negate our new and improved dps? (especially on mobs you can't feign aggro off - ie: alot of undead)

3) Why not give monks an aggro-reducing/evade-like skill that doesn't reduce our dps, and only *slightly* nerf the fist ratio(ie: to 16/21 or 17/22 or something similiar)

</p>

Fopoodzo

10-30-2002, 11:35 AM

That's the problem with the mitigation nerf they've turned monks into pure damage dealer (who cannot take to many hits).

Yet for that role monks deal sub par damage, significantly less than a rogue or bow firing ranger, and only slightly more than a warrior and meleeing ranger (whislt now lacking either's tankability).

When monks are given a damage increase by mistake it is removed - suggesting monks aren't supposed to deal damage or that VI doesn't understand what they've changed with the mitigation nerf.

Not only is the damage delt/ability to take damage ratio underpower for monks now (compared to rogues, warriors, rangers etc.), but ALSO as stated monks have no ability to reduce hate without also reducing DPS.

If VI wants to make monks pure damage dealers, then they need to MAKE monks deal damage (not just slightly more than a warrior) and give monks the tools to do so.

Pre-nerf

62.85dps (warrior) = 1.0

69.81dps (monk) = 1.1

94.15dps (rogue) = 1.5

Needs to be Post-nerf:

62.85dps (warrior) = 1.0

78.56dps (monk) = 1.25 (or at least 1.15-1.2)

94.15dps (rogue) = 1.5

</p>

10-30-2002, 11:51 AM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Ok it's simple enough to tell (from the nerfs) what monks AREN'T supposed to be.

How about VI tell us what monks ARE supposed to be.<hr></blockquote>

I'd have to agree we know what we aren't supposed to be. It's also apparent That SOE has no clue what we ARE supposed to be.

Jebaniz (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=133718) 55 Monk</p>

10-30-2002, 01:18 PM

Well, Verant said their change to monk fist damage was too much of an increase. That means, they do indeed agree that monks needed a damage increase. Right or wrong, they perceive the amount of the increase, to be too great.

When building a group, in a pre-pop zone.. I would always look for damage dealers. As in a cleric for superior heals to druid/shaman, either an enchanter or bard for mez and mana.. and 4 damage dealers. I liked having one rogue, one monk, one ranger.. and one nuker. That way, we had FD puller with good frontal damage, we had good duel wielding with Gar buffs and we had rear damage in the group.

In planes of power, it seems the typical mob has fewer hit points then other mobs, but hits for a whack load more.. I've been hit for 798pts in Disease from a common nothing special mob with my 1100ac. So ideal group for PoP would be a slower.. a high mana pool cleric.. a high hit point defensive tank (warrior/paladin/shadowknight) and as much damage as possible.. My groups have lately been the same people... ie.. Cleric, Shaman, ShadowKnight, Ranger, Monk, Rogue..

<FONT COLOR="FF00FF">
Adicia 61st ROG // Ariya 61st CLR // Ualaa 58th DRU // Zaena 46th ROG // Draenor 39th NEC // Jaisa 37th SK // Channa 35th MAG // Natasia 33rd BRD // Excelcia 30th ENC // Lunna 30th RNG // Jenessa 20th WIZ // Zyja 20th WIZ // Caelysta 19th SHM // Trug 19th SHM // Ayna 18th MNK // Mirsha 17th BST // Quecha 15th NEC // Caia 13th ENC // Aianna 10th MNK // Trysha 9th PAL // Cydanna 2nd WIZ // Dordanni 2nd CLR.</Font>
</p>

Srrak

10-30-2002, 01:42 PM

I think the ones that apparantly been hit the most hardest, the casual, mid-level monk, is quite forgotten about.. AAexp and all is very nice, tho, for us who got quite a long road to go before we'll get any, is in my opinion. fumbling in the dark.. so was the lvl 65 fists, and I feel sorry for those who was approaching and reached that level only to feel the nerf wand upon them again..

However, I'd wish that VI would think about us mid-level casual monks. I absolutely love the game, but being a registered nurse working in a trauma unit, I'm happy if I get 1-3 hours of game play a day.. I'd like VI to understand that not every player have the oppertunity to play 6-7 hours a day in groups, which they've kind of showed that their vision is, based on their attitude about soloing. I really don't find it approriate and nice to shout for a group and stay there for about an hour, and then take my leave.. no, I'd rather solo'd, if VI'd let me to.

I do hope that VI is thinking about the mid-level character, no matter what class, and don't make the mistake as they've done with the monk mitigation nerf. made it hard, or impossible for the casual player to make any progress.. even tho we're on for maybe an hour or two each day, we're still paying our $12.95/month..

Thank you for listening, I hope something I've said made any sense..

- Srrak

Lvl 47 Monk

Luclin

</p>

Fopoodzo

10-30-2002, 02:51 PM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>I'd have to agree we know what we aren't supposed to be. It's also apparent That SOE has no clue what we ARE supposed to be. <hr></blockquote>

Unfortunately that seems to be the case. <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/frown.gif ALT=":(">

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>However, I'd wish that VI would think about us mid-level casual monks. I absolutely love the game, but being a registered nurse working in a trauma unit, I'm happy if I get 1-3 hours of game play a day.. I'd like VI to understand that not every player have the oppertunity to play 6-7 hours a day in groups, which they've kind of showed that their vision is, based on their attitude about soloing. I really don't find it approriate and nice to shout for a group and stay there for about an hour, and then take my leave.. no, I'd rather solo'd, if VI'd let me to.

I do hope that VI is thinking about the mid-level character, no matter what class, and don't make the mistake as they've done with the monk mitigation nerf. made it hard, or impossible for the casual player to make any progress.. even tho we're on for maybe an hour or two each day, we're still paying our $12.95/month..<hr></blockquote>

The monk was a great class for that, the mitigation nerf hit that style of play harder than anything else.

It's a real shame becasue a LOT of people liked, or needed to play like that.

In the end VI is hurting itself by discouraging such players.

</p>

10-30-2002, 02:56 PM

Well, that's why I started my Monk; I wanted to play a pure melee that could also solo reasonably well when not in a group and didn't need uber equipment to do so. Now they're a pure melee who can't solo effectively at all without uber equipment, which is totally against what the class was or should be.

</p>

10-30-2002, 04:18 PM

I am *so* glad that Verant applied the Nerf bat to Monks! Now that they are taking buttloads more damage, I look much more desirable than that druid sitting over there when a monk-pulling group is LF healers <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/smile.gif ALT=":)">

<img src=http://home.mindspring.com/~iamweaver/images/BerrewSig001.jpg>

Lupic Wulfsib (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=404688>DorfView</a>
<a)

</p>

Fopoodzo

10-31-2002, 04:02 AM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>I am *so* glad that Verant applied the Nerf bat to Monks! Now that they are taking buttloads more damage, I look much more desirable than that druid sitting over there when a monk-pulling group is LF healers <hr></blockquote>

That's all well and good, when monks are in the group.

But more and more post nerf monks are being purposly overlooked for other more viable melee classes. <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/frown.gif ALT=":(">

</p>

10-31-2002, 06:01 AM

So Berrew you're the sort of person that gets their kicks by going to other class boards and gloating over their nerfs?

Well, my toon in game may well have been nerfed, but when i log out that's all gone... when you log out you're still left with a nerfed personality.

<hr />
<div>
Xarnak "Death to all fanatics" Clawfist (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=266873), Iksar Monk of Xev.
</div>
<div>
Dubious member of Hawkestone (http://pub72.ezboard.com/bhawkestone).
</div>

<div>

"I stare, it stares back.

I long to know its feelings.

It demurs. Lunch, then."

</div></p>

Wubao

10-31-2002, 06:14 AM

"I look much more desirable than that druid sitting over there when a monk-pulling group is LF healers"

Would these be KC groups or Seb groups that you're trying to get in?

:P

Wu

</p>

10-31-2002, 07:07 AM

i heared about a wep on Test that may go life with uber stats and clickable instant unlimited charges Feign Death.. no joke

-Grandmaster Valentino (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=67172)

</p>

Fopoodzo

10-31-2002, 07:52 AM

I think that's an actual item, but GM only.

If something like that went live then the next step would be to delete the monk class. <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/smile.gif ALT=":)">

</p>

10-31-2002, 08:03 AM

Berrew, you'll be happy to know I copied your post onto your guild message board so your Monk guildmates can know what you think of them.

Enjoy.

<hr />
<div>
Xarnak "Death to all fanatics" Clawfist (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=266873), Iksar Monk of Xev.
</div>
<div>
Dubious member of Hawkestone (http://pub72.ezboard.com/bhawkestone).
</div>

<div>

"I stare, it stares back.

I long to know its feelings.

It demurs. Lunch, then."

</div></p>

10-31-2002, 08:46 AM

''Berrew, you'll be happy to know I copied your post onto your guild message board so your Monk guildmates can know what you think of them.''

Owned.

Mitch

</p>

10-31-2002, 09:35 AM

Sigh. I am sorry. I *did* place a smiley at the end of that post. Shouldn't try to post a joke on an incentiary topic like this..

Here is my reply in my guild board:

"It was an interesting thread. but a Looooooong one... Verant has, unfortunately, painted itself into a corner here, as they want to increase overall the damage that a high-end monk will take but not make things *too* difficult for the rest of the pack. I am not sure they have done it well, as it looks as though they have increased damage taken by the average soloing monk by about 1.8x. Ouch."

I was trying to voice SUPPORT for you all. Sorry that many seemed to take it the wrong way. Do you think that I *want* to see our puller drop FD on the ground on every pull? Hey - I gotta save my Mana for Smiting! <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/smile.gif ALT=":)">

***edit *** note that that is an *increase* of 1.8x - it does indeed look to me as though my poor monk group mates suffer 2-3x the DPS now. This is *not* a "Verant(TM) Good Thing"

<img src=http://home.mindspring.com/~iamweaver/images/BerrewSig001.jpg>

Lupic Wulfsib (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=404688>DorfView</a>
<a)

</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/bmonklybusiness43508.showUserPublicProfile?gid=ber rew>Berrew</A> at: 10/31/02 5:53:15 am

Pokiri

10-31-2002, 10:54 AM

D'oh. We're a little sensitive about this, given the trolls that seem to surface around here <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/frown.gif ALT=":(">

</p>

Fopoodzo

10-31-2002, 11:11 AM

Berrew - As Pokiri says everyone's a little oversensitive and on the defensive due to the unbelievable number of people coming here purely to troll and gloat over the nerf.

After you've been told by the 100th person that the change that's just seriously impacted on the fun you get out of your class and EQ is 'deserved' and 'not enough' etc., combined with the way VI has been completely silent on the issue (and more importantly the side effects of the change) and the other recent nerfs.

Well it does feel a bit like everyone is out to get you, even when they are not. <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/frown.gif ALT=":(">

</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/bmonklybusiness43508.showUserPublicProfile?gid=fop oodzo@monklybusiness43508>Fopoodzo</A> at: 10/31/02 7:12:53 am

OokeyIkky

10-31-2002, 11:28 AM

Rangers better dmg deaLERS than monks? Damn I know we got fucked but still, rangers? wow this is embarassing

</p>

10-31-2002, 12:26 PM

Actually, what *I* am hoping is that Verant will increase the proc rate of the "monk-only" defensive skill, block. THen I can enjoy a few weeks of uberness until they drop the skill cap on my little BST to 4xlvl+4 <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/smile.gif ALT=":)">

<img src=http://home.mindspring.com/~iamweaver/images/BerrewSig001.jpg>

Lupic Wulfsib (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=404688>DorfView</a>
<a)

</p>

Fopoodzo

10-31-2002, 06:21 PM

Hehe a block rate increase would be nice, might compound some of the problems they were trying to solve with the mitigation nerf though.

Why they didn't simply remove monk AAXP mitgation bonuses rather than nerfing the base mitigation for monks I'll never know.

This would have effectively reduced the mitigation at high level, and left low level monks alone (rather than nerfing fdrom L1-65).

Also they could have replaced the mitigation AAXP bonuses with some damage bonuses, like Carnagh's elemental fist damage ( pub35.ezboard.com/fmonkly...3875.topic (http://pub35.ezboard.com/fmonklybusiness43508frm1.showMessage?topicID=33875 .topic) ).

This would have been a better solution all round.

</p>

11-02-2002, 09:58 AM

Frodopozo, can you explain where you get these figures from:

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>"

Pre-nerf

62.85dps (warrior) = 1.0

69.81dps (monk) = 1.1

94.15dps (rogue) = 1.5

Needs to be Post-nerf:

62.85dps (warrior) = 1.0

78.56dps (monk) = 1.25 (or at least 1.15-1.2)

94.15dps (rogue) = 1.5

"<hr></blockquote>

The 1st figures look like the numbers taken from my Statue parse. A scenario in which I ALREADY explain that the warrior has several advantages from the get-go in terms of damage because he used /disc and was in a bard/necro group to increase ATK and haste.

I'll invite you to stop pulling figures out of your ass. 3 logs have been posted here; all showing monks doing on average about 31% more damage than warriors. Monks are already 1.3 vs warrior 1.0. Posting uttery false numbers does nothing to help your argument when they are so horribly misleading.

<div style="text-align:center"><span style="font-size:small;">Wilhelmm D'averam
Warlord of the Apocalypse</span>

<a href="http://

http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=46100">

Wilhelmm's Profile</a>

</div></p>

11-02-2002, 10:26 AM

From what I have seeen.. monks are about 30% more than a warrior and rogues are about 60%-70% more. It would be nice to be closer to the Rogues damage though. Since monks can't even tank at a pinch in PoP some damage increase would be nice.

</p>

11-02-2002, 10:50 AM

It's particulary interesting to see how much monk envy there is in the high end game. If you wanted the power of a monk so bad, why did you make your "whatever"? Go play your warrior/rogue/necro and don't troll. I never even bother reading boards for other classes, and certainly don't have the RL time to waste to go there and post about how they deserved it and they needed to be taken down a few points. Man, this must be that neighbor that keeps complaining about how those kids on the next block aren't living life the way she thinks they should. So run along missy troll, go yell at that guy for walking his dog on your side of the street.

I've already left one non-guild raid since this nerf after the "Monks suck now" started in the raid channel and a good % of the people started in on how it was needed and how monks were overpowered. Too bad for them, I wasn't going to hang around, they wiped out completely and had a 3 hr cr because the raid leader didn't know have anyone with experience to split the giants and I feel sorry for the monk that stayed. Yea I could have stayed and maybe they would have seen things differently if I had done the split and we all had gotten nice exp and loot, but I decided to spend time with ppl that won't whine about my dps or how I get aggro occaisionally.

You want to play with ppl that know their class and give you an enjoyable evening in the high end game, then don't whine about how they need to have their skills cut back. All it can take is one person that ebay'd their acct and that thinks that he shouldn't be medding but would really rather be a melee enchanter to wipe out a good group.

</p>

Tempur

11-02-2002, 02:22 PM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Monks are already 1.3 vs warrior 1.0. Posting uttery false numbers does nothing to help your argument when they are so horribly misleading.<hr></blockquote>

don't it just SUCK when people post bad information about your class? ya never know....it might just convince SOE to do something like nerf you. but hey, you warriors wanted to tank.....why should you be worried about doing damage.

<a href=http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=67354>Tempur Flarin</a> - The Maniac Monk
Vitam Aeternam

I have come to kick ass and chew bubblegum, and I'm all out of bubblegum.</p>

Durge Blackhand

11-02-2002, 04:09 PM

You know I can deal with the mitigation nerf, and I can deal with the fist nerf. But for god's sake give me my goddamn gauze press back, pre-nerf!!! <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/mad.gif ALT=">:">

Oneli

http://www.gaijindesign.com/lawriemalen/jedi/jedimaster.jpg
<a href=http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=311146>Oneli's Stuff</a></p>

11-02-2002, 09:42 PM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>"don't it just SUCK when people post bad information about your class? ya never know....it might just convince SOE to do something like nerf you. but hey, you warriors wanted to tank.....why should you be worried about doing damage."<hr></blockquote>

Yes, why don't you please show me the *bad* information that I've posted. My 1.3 vs 1.0 number comparison comes from 3 separate logs, one my own, the other 2 from logs posted on this very board. Please show me the *bad* information I have posted that hints at warrior nerfage.

As for your last sentence. See, here's the thing, I'm not worried about my damage. I think warrior damage output is just fine considering they adjusted mitigation for us (not in respect to monks, just in general). No where here do you see me complain about a lack of damage exerted by a warrior. I am simply dispelling the myths held by certain people that monks only do 5% more damage than warriors; because this is simply not the case.

To the person posting about trolling. Not everyone posting here that isn't a monk is screaming that monks deserved the nerf, or that they are/were overpowered. Not everyone is screaming "you deserved it because...". Some people, such as me, are posting from work because we are bored, to correct certain false data designed to arouse sympathy.

Monks arguing that their damage should be more comparable to rogues have a reasonable argument in my opinion, as the disparity here is quite large. Then again, I have a feeling rogue damage output will eventually be lowered. My only consern is people preaching that warriors deal almost the same damage as monks and are far superior tanks. Superior tanks we are, for most mobs. However, we don't deal almost the same damage as you do.

<div style="text-align:center"><span style="font-size:small;">Wilhelmm D'averam
Warlord of the Apocalypse</span>

<a href="http://

http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=46100">

Wilhelmm's Profile</a>

</div></p>

11-02-2002, 11:25 PM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Then again, I have a feeling rogue damage output will eventually be lowered.<hr></blockquote>

that definitely wouldn't solve the problem heh, is like balancing hybrid ANYTHING with pure melee classes. I figgure monks might as well be hybrids without the bennifit of spells.

I would propose a question, take away FD and what merrits would anyone consider rolling a monk?

</p>

11-02-2002, 11:27 PM

doh wifes account previously lol

</p>

Fopoodzo

11-03-2002, 06:45 AM

Obviously the amount of damage dealt changes, but parse to parse, level to level and gear level to gear level one thing stays remarkably constant.

The RATIO of warrior/monk/rogue damage.

This is where the problem with monk damage occurs not whether monks did 10% or 20% or 30% more damage then warriors on one particular mob, BUT what ratio of warrior/monk/rogue damage occurred.

(this is only possible when all participants are going for max damage - obviously a warrior using taunt rather than damage weapons and using defensive isn't a valid comparison.)

Warrior 36.9 = 1.0

Monk 46.1 = 1.2

Rogue 69.8 = 1.9

|********** (warrior)

|************ (monk)

|****************** (rogue)

Warrior 43.3 = 1.0

Monk 57.8 = 1.3

Rogue 81.9 = 1.9

|********** (warrior)

|************* (monk)

|******************* (rogue)

Warrior 46.1 = 1.0

Monk 58.0 = 1.2

Rogue 89.7 = 1.9

|********** (warrior)

|************ (monk)

|******************* (rogue)

Time after time it comes out to be (damage) rogue>>>monk>warrior.

Post mitigation nerf it this NOT balanced, it needs to be (damage) rogue>>monk>>warrior.

Which an increase in monk base damage of about 10-15% would just about give.

It doesn't matter if the monk is doing 30% more than the warrior if the rogue is dealing 90% more than the warrior.

(although in a lot of cases warriors DO come close to monk damage, HOWEVER this isn't a bad thing TM overall, only in the sense that monks need a small damage upgrade).

</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/bmonklybusiness43508.showUserPublicProfile?gid=fop oodzo@monklybusiness43508>Fopoodzo</A> at: 11/3/02 2:49:32 am

Fopoodzo

11-03-2002, 07:04 AM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>As for your last sentence. See, here's the thing, I'm not worried about my damage. I think warrior damage output is just fine considering they adjusted mitigation for us (not in respect to monks, just in general). No where here do you see me complain about a lack of damage exerted by a warrior. I am simply dispelling the myths held by certain people that monks only do 5% more damage than warriors; because this is simply not the case.<hr></blockquote>

Warrior damage is fine in the sense of how much damage they can potentially deal (same with rangers etc.), where the problem occurs is when you compare potential damage dealing vs. potential tanking abilities.

When you compare these it's NOT that warriors, rangers, rogues etc. come out overpowered (in either damage, tanking or over all), but rather that monks come out <span style="text-decoration:underline">underpowered</span> - post mitigation nerf.

Monks were nerfed when they needed to be BALANCED. (i.e. reduce mitigation a bit, increase base damage a bit)

You'd think VI would have learnt from the kunark/ranger debacle, but it seems they have not. (although they have finally put rangers in about the right position)

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Monks arguing that their damage should be more comparable to rogues have a reasonable argument in my opinion, as the disparity here is quite large. Then again, I have a feeling rogue damage output will eventually be lowered. My only consern is people preaching that warriors deal almost the same damage as monks and are far superior tanks. Superior tanks we are, for most mobs. However, we don't deal almost the same damage as you do. <hr></blockquote>

Monks don't need (or for the most part) want to do rogue like damage, that's the rogues fortay, as tanking is the warriors, just to be brought into balance post-mitigation nerfs.

With a small base damage increase to put monks squarely inbetween warriors and rogues in damage, to compensate for the fact that monks tanking ability has been nerfed down to near the level of rogues.

Rogues would still do a significant amount more damage (to account for their more situational needs) but monks would actually have some value in the job they've been nerfed into by VI.

</p>

11-05-2002, 07:42 PM

Perhaps the problem is that it is difficult to compare classes. Comparing an ubermonk to a commonWarrior gives one result. Comparing a commonMonk to an uberWarrior gives another.

I play a warrior. I can say, with 100% certainty, that our guild monks of similar experience and gear outdamage me by an embarassing amount.

Sucks to be nerfed, but the sad facts of the matter was that the monks could also outtank the warriors on 90% of the mobs we fought.

Things could be harder for monks in the high game, dunno, I am not there. But for sixty and below, monks were way overpowered.

Ahz (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=104898)

</p>

11-05-2002, 08:52 PM

look at this, it might help:

wolf.webcruiser.org/index.php?ref=73075 (http://wolf.webcruiser.org/index.php?ref=73075)

</p>

11-05-2002, 10:15 PM

Monks were not overpowered.

Shamans soloing Juggs in Seb is overpowered.

Chanters being able to DC something that FAR outdamages me and has 10x my hp and then SOS it, is overpowered.

Druids being able to solo the mobs that drop their Elysian is overpowered.

Druids / Wizards being able to kill 4 DB mobs at once when I can maybe drop a light blue solo is overpowered.

Necros soloing dragons is overpowered.

Were monks bitching about any of this? Nope.

We were happy with the varied skills and abilities playing a monk gave us.

And we made sacrifices for it.

Not being able to wear anything but leather.

Not being able to wield anything but blunt weapons.

Not being able to carry any loot.

We can use the same argument.

Warriors are overpowered. They do decent damage, have lots more hp, can wear any class of armor they want, can wield any class of weapon they choose, have FAR more gear selection, and can carry it around with them without penalty.

Sound like it makes sense? I didn't think so.

Kindly refrain from coming here and baiting us with any more

"You were overpowered" or "You deserved it" remarks.

I put 3 years into Mala, and the rules have changed to the point where I don't find him worth playing anymore.

It's causing this community enough grief already.

Pouring salt on the wounds is nothing but shallow.

Mal

</p>

Fopoodzo

11-06-2002, 03:53 AM

Something tells me IF warriors were nerfed to suddenly take 20-30% more damage in EVERY situation, they wouldn't just 'suck it up' and happily smile about it and say 'we deserved it'

Nor if rogues, wizards (or any caster for that matter) suddenly was doing 30% LESS damage per cast.

But no, monks are supposed to be happy about being nerfed rather than balanced. /boggle.

</p>

Wubao

11-06-2002, 06:28 AM

"I can say, with 100% certainty, that our guild monks of similar experience and gear outdamage me by an embarassing amount."

Get a Windblade or a Stonebladed Axe of Dismay.

You'll start to catch up.

-Wu

</p>

Fopoodzo

11-07-2002, 08:45 AM

Yup.

</p>

11-07-2002, 05:38 PM

/rude Windblade

<hr />
<div>
Xarnak "Death to all fanatics" Clawfist (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=266873), Iksar Monk of Xev.
</div>
<div>
Dubious member of Hawkestone (http://pub72.ezboard.com/bhawkestone).
</div>

<div>

"I stare, it stares back.

I long to know its feelings.

It demurs. Lunch, then."

</div></p>

11-07-2002, 08:32 PM

Lamest thing is.. they buy one item to come close to our damage and we have to get an tnire suit of armour and we are still gimp because our clas has been broken.

By The logic Verant apoplied to monk balance, warriors should do about the same damage as a bard wielding one weapon and rogues should tank like pure casters.

</p>

Fopoodzo

11-08-2002, 05:36 AM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>By The logic Verant apoplied to monk balance, warriors should do about the same damage as a bard wielding one weapon and rogues should tank like pure casters<hr></blockquote>

To make other classes fit to the new monk offence/defence 'ratio' that's pretty much exactly what they'd have to do to other classes.

Otherwise thier either going to have to leave monks as completely subpar or bring monks back into current balance with other classes (in the new monk role of pure damage dealer) with a small base damage upgrade and some better methods of hate reduction.

</p>

11-08-2002, 10:16 AM

The monk class, in my opinion, is now what it was supposed to be. You were never meant to be a tank class. Yes Verant messed up and let you get to close to being one, and then let it go on for too long. Am I taunting you about the nerf? No. I'm sure it stings. But was it necessary? I believe so. I think verant put things in the order they were supposed to be in in the first place. (which THEY goofed, the monk community, just took advantage of what was placed in front of them as any class would. Hell, I would have) And this talk of Rogues tanking better than a monk, come on.

You are a damage class, and a damn fine one. When I'm using a flesh grinder/frosty combo, and a monk of the same level can grab agro from me at will from pure dps, then you are doing some very nice damage. (I'm speaking of a duel weilding monk much less a 2h using monk)

Now on to the meat of my post. This talk of monk=warrior damage needs to stop or a parse log posted. It's just not true. And to prove this I will do the following; I will meet any monk of my level, for a parse. We will use the same weapon, and fight the same mob. Tae ewe war maul sound ok? All my weapon skills are maxed. Its only a 3k weap so almost ANY monk should be able to afford one. Or shall we use comparable dmg/dly 1hders? Similar haste items should be a must also. Absolutely no buffs. Hopefully someone will meet my challenge so we can post a log here to dispell rumors and point to some facts. If I am wrong, I will appologize, but I'm not wrong.

I play nightly from 6pm central to when ever my eye lids get heavy. I will leave my magelo profile also.

Ragingwolf Fyreborne

Black Thorn

Bristlebane

</p>

11-08-2002, 10:31 AM

woops, here it is

www.magelo.com/eq_view_pr...num=262402 (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=262402)

Ragingwolf Fyreborne

Black Thorn

Bristlebane

</p>

11-08-2002, 10:37 AM

We know where the classes stand damage-wise. What you fail to understand is that if you rate warrior and rogue offense defense out of ten and then rate monks on the same scale, monks come up looking like a hybrid class, except the hybrid classes are now actually better too (especially after AAXP).

You say we are a pure offense class and should have no defense because of that? Then warriors defense should mean that they do the damage of a one armed bard. Rogue offense should mean they should defend like a wizard.

The bottom line is.. monks have FD so no nerf is too extreme for them. We effectively have caster hps now, except the HP penalty applies to ALL buffs and equipment we achieve in the future. We are a pure melee class that used to be good damage and above average tanking, remove FD and you will see how rubbish this nerf has made monks.

</p>

Pokiri

11-08-2002, 10:41 AM

Question: Is the mist panther in WL the best mob to do parse comparisons on now?

</p>

Blazyn

11-08-2002, 10:53 AM

Gee, I'd meet you if we were on the same server. But the test wouldn't last long. I've got 200 less AC than you (952) and almost 2000 less HP (I'm at 1592). According to Verant, I'm supposed to do about 20% more damage than you (and rogues 40%). And perhaps I will - for the 40-70 seconds that the fight lasts. With my nerfed mitigation on top of my low AC and HP, it better not last longer than that, or I'm dead.

See, that's the problem with this nerf. It affected everyone, whether they had 900 AC or 1500, and 1500 HP or 3000+.

[54 Disciple] Blazyn (Human) - The Rathe</p>

11-08-2002, 10:58 AM

Who said that? I said you aren't a tank class. Neither is a rogue. Neither is a ranger. You still have great defensive abilities. Just not the mitigation you used to have.

And some of the people in this post don't know about the damage difference. I've seen quite a few monk 1.1 warrior 1.0 and monk=warrior damage posts.

RAGE

</p>

SkyKungfu

11-08-2002, 11:49 AM

Heck I really love those 1-2-3 posters climbing out of their holes telling us all the bull shit what mons are supposed to be.

Sky

</p>

Ugle

11-08-2002, 12:13 PM

Wish I could take you up on that Rage. However to make it an equivalent match, you need say a Windblade or a Dismay Axe, and I will take the best equivalent weapon at the same price/drops from the same level MOB. What that means is that I will probably have an IFS to your Dismay Axe, or maybe a Screamstaff/Amy Staff to your Windblade. To make it a real-world scenario we will both have Chanter/Shammy Haste (so that my CF Haste which doesn't stack in groups doesn't skew the results). Comparing the same weapons isn't really valid because we are talking about comparing what people would be using in groups, gimping us both with a GSC doesn't prove anything. And since you want to compare DPS you need to be using DPS weapons instead of higher-taunt ones.

Then we could parse the damage the way it would be put out in a group scenario. My Warrior used to (this was a while back pre-SoL heh) use Bloodpoint/Bloodfire in most situations. Ratios were decent, but with the procs he kept agro very well. And playing since April 99 I have an idea of how to keep agro. A Stonebladed Axe would do way more damage, but as a tank getting agro fast and keeping it was my priority. As far as getting agro, I know I'm only a L55 N00b. I can keep agro off of my 51 Shammy doing Fire Giants/Imps pretty well, even with his slows and such. But taunt off of a Warrior at will? If I don't FD after the pull back, I've had 10-20 secs of extra agro time, so that's not really fair to compare. If I FD when I get back to the party, and we have a tank who isn't a moron/underequipped for his level/low level, I might be able to get agro if: I'm standing closer to the MOB then you are, I hit Instill Doubt (and hope it doesn't work), beg, and disarm.

I generally have agro problems in the following situations.

I didn't lose agro from the pull

The MOB is ping-ponging and the Tank never gets good agro/has popped defensive

The Warrior is using two Lammies and I have a T-Staff and 3 levels on him

I try to get agro

The Tank isn't trying/competent/decently equipped

Now Rage, all of these issues except the one where I stand between the MOB's legs and TRY to get agro are your fault, maybe you need to look at what YOUR issues are.

</p>

11-08-2002, 01:00 PM

They can take agro at WILL, meaning they can take it and keep it when they want. And I will do the comparison with my windblade vs whatever you say your fair comparison is. And how exactly is same haste, same weap, same mob not fair? If you are doing a group situation, I'll break out my 1hers while you use your 2hb. Is that fair? No. But, I'll still wager with what weaps you pick, fairly, you'll outdamage me easily.

So, who's up for it? I'm level 56, and my magelo profile is listed in a post above.

And Sky, it's not me saying you aren't supposed to be a tank class, it's Verant.

Ragingwolf Fyreborne

Black Thorn

Bristlebane

www.magelo.com/eq_view_pr...num=262402 (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=262402)

</p>

11-08-2002, 01:07 PM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>When I'm using a flesh grinder/frosty combo, and a monk of the same level can grab agro from me at will from pure dps, then you are doing some very nice damage.<hr></blockquote>Sorry, agro does not equal dps.

Syke (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=3700), Guild <a href=http://www.phank.com>Phank</a> of Druzzil Ro</p>

Pokiri

11-08-2002, 01:22 PM

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>

And how exactly is same haste, same weap, same mob not fair?

<hr></blockquote>

Because you can buy a 50/44 windblade in the bazaar for 20-25k, which is less than a tranquil staff. In a way the proper comparison is windblade+RBG versus tstaff+SSHS, but with max enchanter haste.

*shrug* I can't do the test with you because I'm 61 and on a different server, but rest assured I'll do a test with my to-be-60 warrior spouse, on the mist panther, but probably using the weapons both of us normally use (warrior epic/broken drive belt v. khashek's+FoL). I think I can even swing borrowing a cleric so I can do DPS dealt v. taken. Given that my weapons/haste/level are all better, what would you suspect the damage difference would be? Given past parses, I suspect only 10-20% better, but I'll do the test.

I need to know how to do it though: how long of a parse is conclusive?

</p>

11-08-2002, 01:36 PM

Fact is.. I could sell my weight reduction bags and buy a windblade.

"No Drawbacks" BAH!

</p>

Wubao

11-08-2002, 02:07 PM

Someone's not really getting it.

Which is fine. Just means that someone doesn't play a monk.

"The monk class, in my opinion, is now what it was supposed to be."

Glad you feel that way. Of course, you know ... you're not on the sony dev team, so your perspective on the situation isn't exactly what the monk community was seeking.

"You were never meant to be a tank class."

Funny thing about that is, monks have been "ok" tanks since day 1. We're a melee class. We don't have spells. Our ONLY option to defeat a foe is the same one you have ... we have to go toe to toe with it.

So yah, we kinda ARE a tank class. Not on the level a warrior is ... but we certainly are supposed to be able to take a hit.

"Yes Verant messed up and let you get to close to being one, and then let it go on for too long."

For too long actually being from the very first day EQ went live.

"Am I taunting you about the nerf? No. I'm sure it stings. But was it necessary? I believe so. I think verant put things in the order they were supposed to be in in the first place."

I'm sorry but monks never were and still aren't supposed to have DRUID levels of damage mitigation. We're supposed to be better than that. And currently we're not.

"You are a damage class, and a damn fine one. When I'm using a flesh grinder/frosty combo, and a monk of the same level can grab agro from me at will from pure dps, then you are doing some very nice damage."

Depends on what your monk friends are wielding. Heck, I can swipe aggro from my level 61 warrior friend (I'm only 56) with just dual wielding epic fists. The speed of the weapons generates more aggro than his, until the frosty procs.

"(I'm speaking of a duel weilding monk much less a 2h using monk) "

For monks to get better 2hand options than warriors they need to get Screamstaff, Amygdalan War Staff, or better.

Stonebladed Axe of Dismay and Windblade churn out some very good DPS.

"Now on to the meat of my post. This talk of monk=warrior damage needs to stop or a parse log posted. It's just not true."

Parse a Windblade versus a Tranquil Staff please. That would be a very informative parse.

"We will use the same weapon, and fight the same mob. Tae ewe war maul sound ok? All my weapon skills are maxed. Its only a 3k weap so almost ANY monk should be able to afford one."

See, here's where you're not getting it.

Warrior versus monk, solo in a parse, using the SAME weapon, the monk EPIC haste boost and atk boost will come into play and the monk will parse better.

Warrior versus monk in a GROUP (since monks can't solo very well anymore) using DIFFERENT weapons (Windblade versus Tranquil Staff would be the most informative since both cost around the same on my server, and are high quality tradable weapons for each class) would be a much more useful parse.

"Or shall we use comparable dmg/dly 1hders? Similar haste items should be a must also. Absolutely no buffs."

See, the situation you're describing doesn't exist. Monks don't solo much anymore. So really, it applies much more to group situations, where buffs come into play and make certain things like the EPIC effect useless.

Just standing in front of the Mist Panther for 10 minutes with no buffs, and yeah, Monks are going to outdamage warriors.

Take the same two toons, put em in a group, toss Speed of Vallon them and that new Ranger ATK buff, have a windblade in the warrior's hand and a tstaff in the monk's hand and see what happens. Because THAT is the future of your AVERAGE level 65 warrior/monk.

-Wu

</p>

11-08-2002, 02:59 PM

Let's get myself with my windblade, a 56 monk with a tstaff, and the same group/buff situation you are speaking of and parse something. If you aren't on the bb server, then make a level 1 char to follow the group and make sure it is done the way you say is fair. Like I said, if I am wrong then I'll applogize. What zone/mobs to test on?

I'm more than ready to see what happens.

My intention wasn't to be insulting, I just couldn't and still can't believe what I'm reading about the monk=warrior damage.

Also, if you are taking 20-30 percent more damage now than you were, is DOING 20-30 percent more damage than a warrior not good enough? But those percentages will have to wait on a parse.

RAGE

www.magelo.com/eq_view_pr...num=262402 (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=262402)

</p>

shallandra

11-08-2002, 03:02 PM

I think the key debates in the monk nerf argument are this:

- Monks are a pure melee class. We do not get spells.

- Of the pure melee, monks require the most experience to level (0.9 baseline for rogues, 1.0 for warrior, 1.4 for monks).

- Of the pure melee, monks are the only class that has no effective means to wage ranged combat. Sorry, shuriken that hit for 23 dmg on a crit at level 60 do not count.

- Of the pure melee, monks receive the fewest hit points.

- Of the pure melee, we have the hardest to acquire armor.

- Of the pure melee, we have the most limited weapon selection.

- Monks are the only class with an inherit weight limit.

In comparison to warriors:

- Monks do not have taunt.

- Monks do not have a 3-minute defensive.

In comparison to rogues:

- Monks do not have evade.

- Monks do not have backstab.

What monks did get was:

- Feign Death

- Mend

- Sneak

- Stone Stance (powerful, but very short duration)

These abilities counter-balanced each other at the higher levels. They were not too powerful, nor underpowered. It defined the monk's class role, giving them tools to do their job well.

In contrast to the pure melee, monks had balance.

Warriors tanked the best. Rogues inflicted the most damage. Monks pulled the mobs, and floated comfortably between the two extremes.

They payed for this by requiring more experience than either of the other two pure melee, and by sacrificing any form of a ranged attack. (Again, shuriken don't really count.)

Could monks replace warriors as main tanks on raids? Most often the answer is no. Warriors have more HP, more AC, and defensive. A monk cannot compare.

Could monks replace rogues as damage dealers? No. Monks come close, but there is no substitute for a good rogue (or, better yet, six of them).

Monks were simply a strong class that could fulfill either role well, but not well enough to truly replace the other two pure melee classes. You wanted a monk because you knew they could perform a variety of roles.

Now monks no longer have that balance. We are a pure melee class that cannot come close to hybrids in term of utility, nor to pure melee in terms of one thing that we do well (defense or offensively).

We are now defined by our ability to pull, and that is an ability that more often than not tends to get us killed.

Still, I have to say that monks are an essential class. No other class can pull like a monk. However, if Verant wants to see the defense nerf stay, then I would for one ask them to get rid of the studid riposte AXP skills, and give us more tools for pulling instead. Some ideas:

- An AXP to allow monks to stay feigned, even when hit by spells.

- An AXP that increases the range of thrown weapons.

- An AXP that allows a monk to apply their full defense from behind.

Otherwise, they are kind of contradicting themselves here. Are we supposed to tank or aren't we?

</p>

11-08-2002, 03:03 PM

Rage, I'll bet you don't even play a monk. Tell ya what, why don't you start one today, work him up to 50, and come back and post your thoughts then?

</p>

11-08-2002, 03:31 PM

....with the last three points you made about axp suggestions. And I don't know who the last poster was but, I'm not a guest on the Jerry Springer show ok? Say what you will but do something more constructive than flame.

I WANT to do the parse. Not to point and say I told you so, but because I want rumors about damage comparisons dispelled.

The monk is a class that can never be replaced. Period. Your pulling skills make you invaluable. And your damage output is terrific. Your FD is also invaluable to you and your guild/group. How many warriors do you acutally need on a raid? 1, 2 at most? Instead of 30 warriors on a raid, I'm sure that most raid leaders would rather have 2 warriors and 28 monks. I play with monks constantly, and I haven't seen their skill or play ability hurt at all. Solo ability I cannot comment on. I haven't been able to solo since level 13.

Anyway, the challenge is up.

RAGE

www.magelo.com/eq_view_pr...num=262402 (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=262402)

</p>

Wubao

11-08-2002, 04:23 PM

Mist Panther is a popular choice for parses.

I'd be very curious to see your results.

Alas, I am not on your server. But, eh, shouldn't be too big a deal. Just parse it. Let us know the buffs you use, and post the data.

I'm very interested to see how Windblade stacks up against things from a DPS perspective, mainly because its ratio is so frightening.

-Wu

</p>

Fopoodzo

11-09-2002, 04:26 PM

All parses are a good thing.

Some how I suspect that they'll just end up supporting a small monk damage upgrade like the rest, but it'll be interesting to see.

</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/bmonklybusiness43508.showUserPublicProfile?gid=fop oodzo@monklybusiness43508>Fopoodzo</A> at: 11/9/02 12:26:39 pm

11-09-2002, 05:24 PM

Rage doing the parse wil be valuable.. make sure you take everything ito acount ncluding the two characers aaxp skills.

Apparently windblade drops of yard trash too.. I'm personally looking for whatever will be the new TStaff.. not much for monks out there yet though.

</p>

Fopoodzo

11-11-2002, 11:21 AM

Any parses yet?

</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/bmonklybusiness43508.showUserPublicProfile?gid=fop oodzo@monklybusiness43508>Fopoodzo</A> at: 11/12/02 1:24:01 am

11-11-2002, 11:45 AM

I would imagine Windblade would beat T-Staff. Too bad the T-Staff is more than double the price.

Closest Droppable monk weapon would be Amygdalan War Staff, but they're very hard to find and run about 5 times the cost of Windblade.

</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/bmonklybusiness43508.showUserPublicProfile?gid=zik oz>Zikoz</A> at: 11/11/02 8:00:48 am

Pokiri

11-11-2002, 02:09 PM

Spouse is still leveling, I don't want to compare a 59 warrior to 61 monk with better gear/AAs. At least 60 to 61 would be somewhat even.

Oddly enough, amy staff = 40k on Prexus, same as tstaff. Windblade is still 25k though there are less for sale now.

</p>

11-12-2002, 05:29 AM

On Xev

T-Staff 55k

A-Staff 35k

Windblade 25k

The A-staff seems to have dropped recently. Couple of weeks ago it was the same price as the T-Staff.

<hr />
<div>
Xarnak "Death to all fanatics" Clawfist (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=266873), Iksar Monk of Xev.
</div>
<div>
Dubious member of Hawkestone (http://pub72.ezboard.com/bhawkestone).
</div>

<div>

"I stare, it stares back.

I long to know its feelings.

It demurs. Lunch, then."

</div></p>

11-12-2002, 09:16 AM

no parsing yet. No one on Bristlebane has contacted me.

Still Waiting.

Ragingwolf Fyreborne

Black Thorn

Bristlebane

</p>

Pokiri

11-12-2002, 09:25 AM

Just bought a windblade for 19k. Spouse hasn't hit 60 yet though so I can't parse yet - I'm positive triple attack will make too much of a difference to parse before then <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/frown.gif ALT=":(">

</p>

Fopoodzo

11-21-2002, 04:14 AM

Still hoping. <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/smile.gif ALT=":)">

</p>

11-22-2002, 05:12 AM

i would hope that said warrior used agressive and said monk used innerflame for the parse. you know to show the true effect of maximum dps both classes can do. after all that is what the parse is for right. to see where about the warrior with windblade and a monk with a Tstaff stack. both classes useing there most offensive disc would be a interesting parse to read.

</p>

11-22-2002, 10:56 AM

As of yet, I have had to takers on my challenge.

57 warrior

Bristlebane Server

Ragingwolf Fyreborne

www.magelo.com/eq_view_pr...num=262402 (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=262402)

I can tell you this. I was bored last night, so I headed to KC for some easy kills. I joined a group in DC. We had a monk in group, and we were multipulling (monk and I, KC xp is the suck). This monk was using 2hb (I think it was a tstaff, unsure atm). He could and would take agro from me any time he wanted. After I noticed this (I was using Fleshgrinder/red epic at first, actively taunting, close proximity, hot key begging, and using disarm also.) I became a little curious about who this monk was. So I began to use differnt wep combos. Anklesmasher/sarnak hammer, anklesmasher/blueblade for attack/dex and finally my windblade. My conclusion was this; If this monk wanted agro, he kept it, no matter what I did. Now, in general this is what I am used to, and it wouldn't have bothered me if he was say, level 57/56/55. But this monk was level 53, that's right 53. His name is Freefall.

I would like to reiterate my respect for monks. I have nothing against the class. But here are some of the things I have heard in this thread.

1. DPS is not agro. No idea where the person who said this got it from. DPS=great agro.

2. Monk damage = Warrior Damage I think most monks know this not to be true.

3. Differing opinions on how the test should be done and with what weaps. How would it be fair? On pure damage potential (raid)? 2h weaps, same haste? true xp group damage? 2/1hs for the war, and 2hb for the monk?

Full buffs for both chars? No buffs? I will do whatever test you guys think is fair. Period.

Monks still have a great role in game puller, damage dealer, rampage tank. Personally, I don't see what the fuss is about. warrior damage =1.0 monk damage=1.2, warrior mitiagtion=1.0 monk mitigation = .8. (Although monk damage is far more than 1.2) Looks like a fair trade off to me. Especially when you look at Sk's and Pallys. I understand your frustration of losing what you had, but it was a necessary move by VI. If you can't see the disparity between a monk being able to solo not just effectively, but efficently with substantially less hps than war/sk/pally, then I'm sorry.

I see people saying that since your pajamas had the "magic" tag on em, they should mitigate like plate. Well, last time I checked all the plate I have on has a "magic" tag also. When verant stated that if you put a monk and a warrior infront of a mob, the monk would end up taking less damage than the warrior, that should have said it all. It wasn't supposed to be that way. The combination of monk mitigation/avoidance was too much. It made you too powerful, especially together with your damage output.

Well, back to my original post's point; The challenge is still up. I just need someone to contact me to let me know when/where

Thank you for your time.

RAGE

</p>

11-22-2002, 01:04 PM

monks dont RT so well anymore

Sensei Lucsa Kurobuchi (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=195825)

Transcendent

Crusaders of Plilo (http://www.raarcentral.com)</p>

Wubao

11-22-2002, 05:02 PM

"If you can't see the disparity between a monk being able to solo not just effectively, but efficently with substantially less hps than war/sk/pally, then I'm sorry."

It's the substantially less hit points that allowed the monks to BE more effective at soloing. Less HPs to regen.

Monk DPS is high. So the crap/trash mobs melees target to solo die QUICKER. Rogue DPS, while higher in raids/groups is obviously much lower solo. The whole backstab thing. But monk DPS isn't.

So mobs die quicker.

Less HPs on the monk means less HPs to bandage. It means less time to sit and regen if you're going to wait to be full or close to full again.

Add in mend. The ability to get 25 percent of your HPs back in one shot. Combine mend with binding wounds up to 70 percent. That equals 95 percent of your HPs every 6 minutes.

Put that together with the high DPS that rips through mobs ... AND feign death so you can get out of situations with adds, runners, wanderers, or just a really close fight you don't think you're going to win.

Well of COURSE monks solo'd better.

That had nothing to do with their defensive abilities. It had everything to do with their innate class abilities.

"I see people saying that since your pajamas had the "magic" tag on em, they should mitigate like plate. Well, last time I checked all the plate I have on has a "magic" tag also."

The point is sort of getting lost. It's not that Magic Pajamas should mitigate as well as plate because they're MAGIC. It's that Magic ARMOR that drops off of dragons, the avatar of war, lord inquisitor seru, etc., etc. should mitigate as well as plate because of what it is ... the rarest most valuable magical treasures in the realm.

Think Dungeons and Dragons for a moment. A sash that comes from one of the upper planes, off of one of the very gods themselves, yeah, it's probably going to be just as good defensively as that shield you looted from a dragon 3 campagins ago.

It's magical treasure in a fantasy role playing game.

"When verant stated that if you put a monk and a warrior infront of a mob, the monk would end up taking less damage than the warrior, that should have said it all."

Verant lies. Verant doesn't quite grasp how their own game works. They don't play the game as much or as thoroughly as the players do.

When Verant said a few weeks later that their TESTS and their MODELS didn't work like they were supposed to when the change went live, that said it all.

"The combination of monk mitigation/avoidance was too much. It made you too powerful, especially together with your damage output. "

It wasn't too much. I mean really, there were a paltry few TOP END encounters where monks could be utilized as off tanks or rampage tanks.

There were a few older encounters where vex thal geared monks might be able to tank something they couldn't have their first time around.

And of course monks could tank if need be in an XP group. But then again, with the mob being slowed, they still can. Slow mobs are easy to tank. Cause they're slow.

Verant made these changes to monks specifically in relation to the Planes of Power expansion.

The goal of this expansion has been to force grouping for XP again.

And it's working wonderfully.

By taking away monk solo capabilities ... all they did was add in another element to why players should be LFG tagged in the Plane of Disease if they want to level or AA ding, instead of soloing shroom patches in Fungus Grove.

That way they sell more Planes of Power expansions.

Wubao

Fist of Agnost the Indifferent

Wubao's Gear (http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=85408)

</p>