Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 41 to 73 of 73

Thread: HP levels

  1. #41
    Guest

    Default Re: Monk mitigation nerf was not only ..

    The warriors in my guild have already broken 8k



    Well thanks for stating hte obvious Syke, and it was far from bragging, it was to show that it is not that hard to break 6k..



    Now if I wanted to brag I would mention I was bound in PoM, cause there are like 10 monks in the entire game bound there, and I am one of em. Now thats worth bragging about. Doing something that doesn't even come close to what another 200 monks can do even better seems like a futile brag to me.



    The point is a monk with my equipment shouldn't be able to break 6k.



    Simple as that, my gear has not really improved from Velious era gear (infact its quite subpar of Velious gear) yet my HP are FAR superior to anything a equally Velious equipped monk could achieve during Velious.



    This is only improved upon by monks that are now geared in Luclin gear and grinded more XP.



    This doesn't make sense, it gives us an ability to tank that we shouldn't have because HP > All...



    Ohh why am I wasting my time explaining this to you? You clearly don't want to listen or the argument is clearly too much for you to comprehend I have already written this once so I can only assume you cannot understand it.



    When you can understand it and can come back and debate the issue without pointing fingers and talking out your ass do so, I might by interested in what you have to add.


    I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."

    - Sir Stephen Henry Roberts (1901-1971)</p>

  2. #42
    Guest

    Default The monk image.



    So... you're asking for monk HP gear to be nerfed?



    My guild's aiming to fight Aerin'dar in PoV. He has a 3K DD and a 500/tick DoT. If you don't have 5K+ you'll get low health agro from a single DD. And with that DoT around even 6K gives you extremely little margin for error.



    This expansion more or less seems to assume you have lots of +100 HP items if you want to be anything more than a Kamikaze.






    </p>

  3. #43
    Guest

    Default Re: The monk image.

    Now the fact that they have engineered encounters around having this number of HP just goes to show how shortsighted they are.



    Instead of spending the time and effort it would require to actually fix one of the major problems with EQ...the fact that HP is too readily available and too important a stat, they instead build new encounters around that HP and nerf classes that gain too much from it.



    This is the major reason I see no future 'fix' to the monk class, they will not spend the time and effort fixing the item database and they will not fix encounters they have now engineered around the new HP levels.



    So expect to stay shit for quite awhile.



    (removed unverified information, rather i find the site and link it if its real)


    I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."

    - Sir Stephen Henry Roberts (1901-1971)</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/bmonklybusiness43508.showUserPublicProfile?gid=lor dofkaos>LordofKaos</A> at: 11/29/02 6:19:24 pm

  4. #44
    Guest

    Default Re: Monk mitigation nerf was not only ..

    <blockquote>Quote:<hr>The point is a monk with my equipment shouldn't be able to break 6k.<hr></blockquote>So? Every expansion has given every class new abilities that they previously didn't have. So what! 6k is pathetic for a warrior today. Your taunt is pathetic compared to a warrior today. Monks are far inferior as a tank compared to a warrior. The nerf was unnecessary, and you've given no reason otherwise.


    Syke, Guild <a href=http://www.phank.com>Phank</a> of Druzzil Ro</p>

  5. #45
    Guest

    Default Re: Monk mitigation nerf was not only ..

    Monk couldn't keep aggro as good as a warrior?



    Your having a laugh, if I wanted aggro from a warrior I could take it and I could keep.



    Whats the name of that guy in Griegs, the keyholder...Prast or something?



    I did a raid on him, and because I was not affliiated with the guild who raided Grieg (they were showing me how they did it) as soon as their MT (a ShadowKnight) started attacking Prast..so did I.



    It was a bit stupid really, I should have waited for everyone else, but the SK let me take aggro.



    We had a raid of 50 people beating on Prast...I had about 5secs of to myself, not like I built up aggro for half an hour...



    I held so much aggro I was able to pull him out of a wall when they had pushed him in too much.



    I backed off stood in the middle of the room, and with 50 people beating on him, about 8 clerics casting different types of heals on me...he walked out of the wall and straight over to me.



    Aggro, please. Atleast try and make sense.



    To the number of HP, like I said above, but of course cannot expect you to actually read a thread before you spew forth your opinions, that would be by far too much trouble for you, then you might actually make some sense, its not about comparison, its about what you are able to achieve.



    With 7khp buffed to the gills, you CAN tank, you can tank those mobs that should be the reserve of Warriors, and the reason you can tank is you have the HP to take the beating til the next heal lands.



    And that is all that tanking is about, can you survive til the next heal lands, and if you can, then you can tank.



    Its why Faned tanked Gozzrem, its why Vindi was going to be on the cards after the POP expansion which is why we were nerfed.



    Do I think it was a fair nerf, as I have said, no because it doesn't take into account monks without the huge HP pool.



    Was there a need for a change, yes there was, but its not only needed on us, its needed on other classes too, if a Necro can make 6k buffed...thats too much.



    Trying to gear the game around a broken idea just doesn't bode well for the future.


    I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."

    - Sir Stephen Henry Roberts (1901-1971)</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/bmonklybusiness43508.showUserPublicProfile?gid=lor dofkaos>LordofKaos</A> at: 11/29/02 10:20:01 pm

  6. #46
    Guest

    Default Re: Monk mitigation nerf was not only ..

    at 64, with mediocre gear I have approx 3412 HP unbuffed, only have ND2


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

    [64 Grandmaster] Renalan (Human) <Fury's Edge></div></p>

  7. #47
    Apostle Master Faned's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Posts
    288

    Default Re: HP levels

    Glad to see you understood that post after all LoK. <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/tongue.gif ALT=":p">




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

    </div></p>
    Faned the Mad Monk

  8. #48
    Apostle Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    250

    Default Re: HP levels

    <blockquote>Quote:<hr>

    My guild's aiming to fight Aerin'dar in PoV. He has a 3K DD and a 500/tick DoT. If you don't have 5K+ you'll get low health agro from a single DD. And with that DoT around even 6K gives you extremely little margin for error.

    <hr></blockquote>



    Actually, that's not strictly true, because the DD/DoT is fairly easily resisted (even by me, and I'm hardly uber). However, you probably have a point, because I'm sure there's encounters where that isn't true.



    I was trying to get across that instead of hitting us with the nerf bat when we wear all/all gear, they should give us some reason to wear monk-only stuff that's more in line with the role they have in mind for us.


    </p>

  9. #49
    Guest

    Default The monk image.



    Both of Aerin'dar's AoE's are lure, which is now represented as -150 to the resist check, so without good gear I don't think you'll be resisting them too easily.



    Mind you, this is the old monk gear paradox coming up again. The uber gear with +100HP per location also tends to be the stuff with lots of resists. The average monk gear, say acrylia or velious armor, having precious little of either.




    </p>

  10. #50
    Guest

    Default Re: The monk image.

    im sure its been mentioned heaps before, but one thing you have to consider when comapring monks and warriors relative damage and defence is that damage stacks without limit. Defence doesnt.



    If you have a basic core of a raid, your always going to gain more benifit adding 5 monks to the raid than you are adding 5 warriors.

    Even if monks are only doing 20% more damage than a similar equipped warrior, while the warrior can tank a mob 100% better.. the monk still stacks better.



    Beucase warriors dont stack like monks do, they needed a reason to be very important to the raid. Back when uber monks were within 10% of a warriors tankability.. you could go into a fight with 1 or 2 warriors, and if the chain went wrong, a monk could fill into the role almost as well. The 3rd and 4th warriors at the raid were pretty much useless.. they added less damage than basicly everyone else, and under the rare chance of something going wrong, they were only marginally better than a monk. So while a monk was always adding 20% more damage, your 3rd and 4th warriors were very rarely usefull, and when they were, it was by a small margin.


    </p>

  11. #51
    Apostle Master Faned's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Posts
    288

    Default Re: The monk image.

    <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Beucase warriors dont stack like monks do, they needed a reason to be very important to the raid.<hr></blockquote>



    Huh? What do more monks add that more warriors don't?



    Damage? Then how about: "Because monks don't stack like rogues do, they needed a reason to be very important to the raid."




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

    </div></p>
    Faned the Mad Monk

  12. #52
    Guest

    Default Re: Monk mitigation nerf was not only ..

    <blockquote>Quote:<hr>if I wanted aggro from a warrior I could take it and I could keep<hr></blockquote>The only way you could would be to dual wield SoDs. I really doubt you have those. That's about your only option to out agro a warrior who's trying.


    Syke, Guild <a href=http://www.phank.com>Phank</a> of Druzzil Ro</p>

  13. #53
    Guest

    Default Re: Monk mitigation nerf was not only ..

    Here Syke go to the General Forum, do a search if you didn't see it, search for 'FD is an *EVADE*.



    When you done reading that, ask yourself...why do all these monks need this 'evade' button if they cannot out taunt a warrior.



    Then you can come back and look sheepish.


    I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."

    - Sir Stephen Henry Roberts (1901-1971)</p>

  14. #54
    Guest

    Default Re: Monk mitigation nerf was not only ..

    Haha. Cute attempt at condescending. You know why I like using FD as an evade? It's because I pull the mob, and thus have a head start on agro. And when the mob hits for 500+, holding agro at all is deadly. So, yes, I admit that a monk will gain agro from time to time. Hold it solid, rarely. Gain it after joining in the fight late, unlikely. Break mez and have the mob ignore the chanter, near impossible. So no, you still don't taunt better than a warrior.


    Syke, Guild <a href=http://www.phank.com>Phank</a> of Druzzil Ro</p>

  15. #55
    Guest

    Default Re: Monk mitigation nerf was not only ..

    Who was talking about break mez?



    I said I can take and hold aggro from a warrior, you tried to say that wasn't so, I proved you wrong.



    Now you want to talk about mez?



    Anything else you want to bring to the debate that has nothing to do with the original statement or is that it?



    But to answer you anyway...



    To breaking mez..thats what Memblur and Root are for, takes just as long to do either of those as it does for a warrior to taunt enough before breaking, so what difference does it make which you use?



    Not that breaking Mez has ANYTHING at all to do with what we are discussing..but thought I would answer it anyway.


    I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."

    - Sir Stephen Henry Roberts (1901-1971)</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/bmonklybusiness43508.showUserPublicProfile?gid=lor dofkaos>LordofKaos</A> at: 11/30/02 9:25:41 pm

  16. #56
    Guest

    Default Re: Monk mitigation nerf was not only ..

    <blockquote>Quote:<hr>I said I can take and hold aggro from a warrior, you tried to say that wasn't so, I proved you wrong.<hr></blockquote>You did nothing of the sort. You gave one example where you held agro when a SK "let" you hold it. You claimed you could "take" agro at will. No you can't. Like I said, come into the fight late, and you won't be taking agro off of anybody. Hold it, maybe. Take it at will, not a chance.


    Syke, Guild <a href=http://www.phank.com>Phank</a> of Druzzil Ro</p>

  17. #57
    Guest

    Default Re: You fail to realise...

    Look why do monks not take aggro at will at fights...yet still need an evade key?



    For the first part of the question the answer is simple, how many monks use a Journey Man's walking stick in fights? None, and not just because of the poor ratio, but because tash has huge taunt.



    Doesn't this imply something to you? That monks do not go for taunt weapons, its not something we do, we don't, unlike warriors, go looking for enraging blow weapons (i don't even think there are any for us). We do not go looking for proc's that have huge aggro on them.



    Yet....to the second part....we STILL take aggro and need an evade key.



    Now put those two together and instead of monks deliberately NOT using aggro weapons...lets say they decided to go out of their way to use aggro weapons.



    Considering we could take aggro without even trying, I suggest we could take it easily when we tried and we could keep it if we wanted to.


    </p>

  18. #58
    Guest

    Default re: Second

    Ohh and to the second part...



    The SK did LET me have aggro...



    And you don't think that every Paladin and every Shadowknight on all of your raids doesn't LET the warrior keep aggro?



    If you don't think that then you don't know nothing about either of those two classes, cause if they wanted aggro, believe me they could take it in a heartbeart.


    </p>

  19. #59
    Monk Disciple
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    107

    Default Re: re: Second

    Boy you're weird.



    The way most RPGs, especially the online type, are built you'll HAVE to compare on equal levels.

    Has a lvl20 Diablo wizzard more hps then a lvl 1 warrior?

    Can a lvl 10 AD&D thief take more punishment then a lvl5 paladin?

    Can a 30 million Shadowrun cyberzombie take down an entire corp security squad?

    You bet!



    "A 65 monk in the best equipment in the game shouldn't be a better tank then a 65 warrior in mediocre gear."



    Why not?

    Equip is everything!

    A fucking DRUID in the best gear tanks better then this warrior!(we've done it, for fun...)

    If this wasn't the case then what would be the point in raids?

    Why get better equip when there wouldn't be a difference?



    Can a M1 Abrams take more punishment then a WWI tank, is faster, and has more powerful weapons? You bet.

    Or if you want a more fantasy setting, twink some stupid hobbit with impenetrable magical chainmail, a magical orc bane sword and a ring with insta invis and he'll wander off and take down the Evil One himself...



    That they didn't compare on equal levels resulted in the nerfage of an entire class because the upper 2% of us could outtank some runofthemill warriors!

    That was akin to nerfing the mana pool of ALL wizzards down to half to reduce the manaburn damage...





    And hp?

    With my next item i'll break 6700 buffed, we have a pally thats a dozen hps from 8k, and a warrior with 9k, looks fine to me.





    And don't even start on aggro, everyone knows that taunt is shit.








    Power corrupts. Absolute power is kinda neat.</p>
    Life is terminal in all known cases.

  20. #60
    Guest

    Default Re: re: Second

    How the fuck does a druid keep aggro?


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

    59 Monk

    Veeshan</div></p>

  21. #61
    Guest

    Default Re: The monk image.

    Monks are great mob positioners as well



    Also Headband of Many Visions is buyable, +20 to resists, 100hp for your head


    Sensei Sejin Saotome
    Grandmaster
    </p>

  22. #62
    Monk Disciple
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    167

    Default Re: The monk image.

    Chain snare?


    Brotor Tiller

    61 Monk

    Rathe

    League of Levity</p>
    All general statements are wrong.

  23. #63
    Guest

    Default Re: The monk image.

    "Why not?"



    Why not?



    how about the fact this is a roleplay game?



    How about the fact that a warrior has trained all his 'life' in the arts of mitigating damage?



    How about that?



    Like I said before in this thread....you think a gunner in the marines would be a better swordsman then a trained Samurai just because you give him a better sword?



    So why the hell should you be a better tank then a trained warrior exactly just cause you got some nice armour?



    When you can come back and explain to me how a gunner in the marines would be a better swordsman then a trained samurai just because he has a good sword then I will consider what your saying not complete and utter bullshit.



    Look at your exmaples and how meaningless they were...



    A level 20 wizard in comparison to a level 1 warrior...



    None of your comparisons were made on the same level...



    Even your nod to Lord of the Rings didn't take into account that Frodo nearly died and even whilst wearing the 'magical chainmail' still got his ass handed to him on a plate by an ogre.



    You want to make comparisons make real ones, a trained 65 warrior should not tank worse then a 65 monk (see notice they are both the same level) regardless of gear.



    Its like saying Ohh Look I am wearing an expensive karate uniform I must be able to do Karate better then that black belt over there cause he is wearing jeans and a T-shirt.



    Get real.


    I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."

    - Sir Stephen Henry Roberts (1901-1971)</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/bmonklybusiness43508.showUserPublicProfile?gid=lor dofkaos>LordofKaos</A> at: 12/2/02 7:24:14 am

  24. #64
    Guest

    Default Re: The monk image.

    <blockquote>Quote:<hr>you think a gunner in the marines would be a better swordsman then a trained Samurai just because you give him a better sword?<hr></blockquote>



    If the gunner has 10 1hs skill and the samurai has 250 1hs skill, then the samurai would be better with any weapon. But if the gunner had 250 skill and the samurai only 200, then why shouldnt the gunner be better even if his main role is pre-disposed to ranged combat style?





    Sure warriors should have an advantage in defense just as monks should have an advantage in offense, but pigeon-holing pure melee classes only serves to make them gimp and takes them to levels of effectiveness that should have been reserved for hybrids alone.



    Be squeezing monks so that they are always worse than warriors as a tank, the class has been left weaker than nearly any other class. The same thing would happen if they lessened wariors damage so that it was always far below monks. If they applied the monk nerf to warrior damage then warriors would be as gimp compared to knights as monks are compared to rangers and rogues.



    The solution is to let pure melee have wider roles and hybrids have narrower roles. That way everyone is useful to a degree, but a pure melee is more versaitle in pure combat roles.



    Bottom line is, if monks were a hybrid damage dealer, I agree they should NEVER outtank a pure melee tank with any equipment. If warriors were a hybrid tank I believe they should NEVER outdamage a pure melee damage dealer with any equipment.



    However the reality is, monks are eclipsed by many classes because we have been balanced to never outtank hybrid tanks, whilst other classes can freely equal or even exceed our damage.





    In the wilds of Antonica, the forest Tanuki were renowned for their sneaky ways.



    Kawai Tanuki
    Celestial Grandmaster of Excelsior

    <center>


    <marquee direction='left'>
    Congratulation!!...AD 2111: All Bases of Cats were destroyed. It seems to be peaceful. But it is incorrect. Cats is still alive. ZIG-01 must fight against Cats again
    and down with them completely . Good luck!!
    </marquee>

    </p>

  25. #65
    Ex-Druid Monk-in-Training
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    73

    Default Re: The monk image.

    True to a point. But not entirely accurate.



    Warriors study tactics. Armor. Weapons. They learn some of their craft from a mentor; the rest of their skill is honed on the battlefield. They do not so much train to take hits, as they are accustomed to it. Warriors embody the philosphy "that which does not kill you, makes you stronger." The cunning, capable warriors advance. The incapable litter the battlefield.



    As for monks, I am presuming monks are based on eastern reference. I do not believe flying kick, round kick, tiger claw, and dragon punch are occidental manuevers. With that in mind...



    For the monk, study of martial combat is not a profession, it is a path to enlightenment. Whether the monk seeks the inner peace of Quellious, to become the ultimate master of their physical self, or to become consummate killing machines, it is a long, strenuous road that requires years of dedication.



    Both classes, ultimately, are about being the best they can on the battlefield. The warrior excels because there is no other option; they live, or die, by their skills. A monk excels because they dedicate their lives to perfection, and no one, not even warriors, can rival that devotion.



    Both are extremely used to taking physical punishment. A warrior takes punishment on the battlefield. A monk takes punishment during training.



    The only real difference between the classes is that warriors nurture the use of armor, while monks do not. The latter requires complete freedom of movement for their craft.



    Now, with that in mind, you place an unarmored monk against an unarmored warrior: The monk is going to win. Period. Place an unarmored monk against an armored warrior and it should be a fair fight. The warrior is trained to be at his best in armor; a monk is trained to be at their best without.



    The problem comes in the form of equipment. Monks are tanks, unarmored. I do not think anyone denies this. It is the entire foundation of the class.



    The problem is simply Verant wenty Monty-Hall on us when they made Velious. Monks should NEVER have gotten armor with warrior-equivalent AC and HP.



    The HP is especially what hurt warriors. I have to agree that monks should never approach warrior HP. Ever. While a monk trains to take hits, a warrior is out there, day in, day out, doing it. To me that is a factor of HP, and with +100 HP items, HP becomes less and less a factor.



    Unarmored, the difference is there. A warrior has twice the HP, or there abouts. Armored, and buffed, the gap is far less noticeable.



    That is what broke the balance, and at this point, there is no easy fix.



    One possible solution would be to make HP scale somehow, by class. They do this now already with stamina. Have the displayed HP be the base HP, the modify it by class. Give knights and warriors a bonus (above and beyond natural durability/planar durability).



    Cannot really downgrade any classes hit points at this point, however, because with 3K+ AE in PoP every class needs an insane amount of HP.



    Another possible solution would be to make mitigation count for more in the end game. It is far, far easier for a warrior to get AC than it is for a monk.



    A third possibility might be to "scale" complete heals. Code it so that when any character is hit with a complete heal, they get an icon. The icon stays with them for 15 - 30 seconds. Any complete heals that land after the first are scaled by class. Warriors and knights get 100% of the complete heal; rangers get 75%; all other classes get 50%.



    Would it eliminate CHeals? No. The monk can still get them while pulling. (Whatever interval proves to be the average time-to-heal between pulls). But with such code in place, only the plate classes could benefit from CH chains.



    In the end though, it needs to be understood that monks are a melee class. They are devoted wholly to the art of fighting, and are used to taking damage. Years of phyiscal development have given them hardened physiques. They are sturdy.



    Toss in pulling and monks do need the ability to take a beating.



    There is no reason a monk with comparable HP/AC should not tank as good as a warrior. The problem is, there is no excuse for a monk encroaching upon the AC/HP of a warrior with a similar time investment.



    That is just lazy itemization and sloppy game design.


    </p>

  26. #66
    Guest

    Default Re: The monk image.

    Tanuki, you should send that to Verant.



    Thats a remarkable well put and well worded explantion.


    I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."

    - Sir Stephen Henry Roberts (1901-1971)</p>

  27. #67
    Guest

    Default Re: The monk image.

    Bravo! *applauds*



    Indeed great material!


    </p>

  28. #68
    Guest

    Default Re: The monk image.

    The problem is, there is no excuse for a warrior encroaching upon the dps of a monk with a similar time investment.



    Monks no longer encroach on a warrior's ability to take damage. Warriors do encroach on a monks ability to deal damage.


    Syke, Guild <a href=http://www.phank.com>Phank</a> of Druzzil Ro</p>

  29. #69
    Guest

    Default Re: The monk image.

    Actually its not so much other classes are encroaching on our DPS territory as it is that we've been at the same relative DPS level for awhile now. Our main problem I see is that we haven't been informing VI enough as a whole class, so when they did the nerf I suppose they thought just about everything was in order /shrug.


    Kaiin Wurmfist Eternal Vengeance <span style="color:red;">56</span>th Master</p>

  30. #70
    Guest

    Default Re: The monk image.

    No the real problems stems between the huge gap between monks now.



    Think back awhile ago, when sleepers and NToV was the highest end and there were no AA and 60 was the max.



    Now we all know that Velious was the expansion that broke the monk game in to two.



    But even then, your best weapons were vulak based, 16/19 with a nice proc...and a 15/20 with Avatard.



    Monks outside Sleepers and NTOV could expect to see 9/16 as possibly the best weapon they were going to see, with a 13/21 in off hand.



    The relative difference in DPS between the two was slim..perhaps a 50% increase in DPS.



    You now have monks with 17/19 and 17/20, with AA that increase damage further still, Critical Hits, Ambi, and more in POP, if you count a monk with Caens and some AA in punishing and in Ingenuity...well its madness.



    You have monks that can parse over 200dps, yet some monks with good gear are lucky to hit over 100dps.



    Thats an almost 100% difference in the amount of DPS.



    It was never like that before, even the best equipped Velious monks were not double the DPS of the mediocre monks.



    In a simple sentence, those that have, have got more, those that didn't have, have got nothing.



    The very strange thing is that if they had not nerfed monk fists from 18/22 the gap would not be so large at 65.


    I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."

    - Sir Stephen Henry Roberts (1901-1971)</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/bmonklybusiness43508.showUserPublicProfile?gid=lor dofkaos>LordofKaos</A> at: 12/2/02 11:00:46 pm

  31. #71
    Monk Disciple
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    107

    Default Re: The monk image.

    LoK, those comparisons where intentionally out of whack, noone would do them, so why now in EQ?



    And your Gunner/Samurai analogy?

    The Gunner would win without a problem, cause a gun is better equipment then a katana...



    But i must admit that i said it somewhat wrong, with level i not really meaned the char level, but more the tier level.

    And between the equip of a guild that farmed VT for months and is now hacking through PoP and a guild thats working on emperor is better be a BIG difference!





    Regarding the gap inside the monk class.

    That happens to EVERY class!

    Even to casters, thanks to FT, giant mana pools and the way spells drop now.

    Take a random char from your local number one guild and compare him to Joe Average, and you'll see a 50-100% difference in power, regardless of class.

    Thats called progression.








    Power corrupts. Absolute power is kinda neat.</p>
    Life is terminal in all known cases.

  32. #72
    Guest

    Default Re: The monk image.

    <blockquote>Quote:<hr>No the real problems stems between the huge gap between monks now.<hr></blockquote>





    Thats what I meant in a sense...the gap has gotten larger, not because the ubers have moved quickly, but the average monk dps really hasn't increased since kunark. With the expection of 61+ levels and aa, that statement is almost completely true in everysituation of the average monk. Mostly due to the fact of the lack of equipment in the "gap" *caugh* T-staff *caugh*.



    No matter what happens to us as a base class. The equipment in the gap needs to be filled now.


    Kaiin Wurmfist Eternal Vengeance <span style="color:red;">56</span>th Master</p>

  33. #73
    Guest

    Default Re: The monk image.

    "The Gunner would win without a problem, cause a gun is better equipment then a katana"



    Err yeah, that was the whole point of giving him a sword.



    I still don't think a monk should tank as good as a warrior and I don't think the majority of monks did, a few did due to insane HP levels and AC but the majority were no where near the level of tanking a warrior can do, or should do.



    I have no problem with increasing slightly the warrior mitigation or of scaling back Monk HP and AC, I just don't see the point of working for 3 years to get to 1300ac just to be hauled back on your ass and told that all that work is now meaningless because we are reducing your effective ac to 1000.



    What was the point of all that work again?


    I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."

    - Sir Stephen Henry Roberts (1901-1971)</p>

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •