Results 1 to 31 of 31

Thread: I still have not got answer!

  1. #1
    Guest

    Default I still have not got answer!

    All you people that think since you can get up to 6k in hp and can out tank a warrior so we should be nerfed this question is for you?



    Why is it that you say since we can get that many hp we should be nerfed when the paly and sk can get even more? So let me get this straight a pure melee class like monks should not be able to tank as well as a warrior but classes that have magic can be even better at it and thats ok? What are you people thinking?



    Taunting! Warriors get out taunted by sk's and pallies period! They can cast spells that will keep agro all day. If the pally or sk know what they are doing you should never get agro. It is so easy to get agro from a warrior that i find myself fding more than fighting<img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/frown.gif ALT=":("> Ok so for taunting monks are on the low end of the stick on this one but we got nerfed?



    I read all these posts and i just cant believe what i am reading these people that claim to be monks just cant be one! Monks have less hp then other melee period. sure some have more than the average tank but hell i am an average equiped monk and i get out hit all the time and that is ok? So it is ok for them to out damage me but i am not allowed to step up to the plate and melee when in a pinch?



    Ok so sk's, pallies and ranger all have magic. They can out tank us and alot of the times they can even out hit us<img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/frown.gif ALT=":("> Um can anyone out there give me a reason that makes any sense why we where nerfed?



    All verant did was take away my ability to solo if they wanted to fix the high end game all they needed to do was fix the warriors taunt button. Regardless of what some monks will tell you we can steal agro sure but it is very hard for us to keep it with the magic users. If they are worried for their dear warriors then they needed to nerf the classes that can actually do alot better of a job then them and that sure the hell isn't the monk. We can dish it out but hey verant is making dam sure with all the drops that other classes can dish it out as well as us anyways. Each patch that goes by with no fix i am one step closer to quitting eq and never investing anything in that changing the rules half way through the game idiots again<img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/frown.gif ALT=":(">




    Sarulle 61 monk

    Braxim 55 ranger

    Brazim 50 cleric



    my magelo profile</p>

  2. #2
    Guest

    Default Re: I still have not got answer!

    ok, i'll put this in short sentences

    SoE dont want monks to tank.

    SoE's fucktards base high end tanking around hp and taunt

    SoE is too lazy and/or too stupid to nerf gear

    SoE nerfs mitigation and fucks lower monks in the ass

    SoE will change thier mistak...eerr whoops "revisit the change"

    SoE are a bunch of gimp fucktards

    I like saying fucktards


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

    59 Monk

    Veeshan</div></p>

  3. #3

    Default Re: I still have not got answer!

    you forgot:



    SOE doesnt want us to solo


    </p>

  4. #4
    Guest

    Default Re: I still have not got answer!



    In the past, a lot of the developers within verant played monks, so the class got a lot of nice things that made monks very ubber. The class was always designed as a high dps, low hp class, but that changed with each expansion.



    In ubber guilds, monks were becoming so good that they were able to tank better against some mobs then the warrior, which started to drive the warrior class nuts.



    Where do people get the ideal that if a character has magic they need to be subpar, just because pal and SK have spells, does not mean they can not do a good job tanking. People do not play these classes to buff people, but to be tanks that have spells.



    To tell you the truth I always thought paladins should have been the MT, and SK the pullers in the game but verant gave the tool's to be the best pullers to monks. I never thought verant would nerf the monk, because all it does is make pulling for raids even slower, unless you are a ubber monk.


    </p>

  5. #5
    Guest

    Default Re: I still have not got answer!

    <blockquote>Quote:<hr>They can out tank us and alot of the times they can even out hit us<hr></blockquote>



    No, sks/hybrids can definately not out damage us "alot of the time". It has been intended since day one for sks/pals to be tanking classes, I dont know why you think because they get spells they shouldnt be able to take hits.


    Brother Coraniz Harhar</p>

  6. #6
    Guest

    Default Re: I still have not got answer!

    Ok a couple of things. I was using magic as a class balancing issue. They have magic we do not. That is a very big plus on their part. Their really isn't a whole lot that we have anymore that other classes dont. They have all these adavantages we dont have that is why people including myself mention the use of magic.



    Second their are alot of times an sk can pull better than a monk even more so now with the nerf and here is an example. Pulling spiders in pon. They spawn in pairs around a tree and when you pull them they both come and leave together quite alot which makes them very hard to single pull. Sk's can combat this with a snare so one is left behind while the other makes it to their home point. Not to mention when these hit they can hit hard up too 600+ from the consorts which needless to say once they ht and hit me with 1 round of combat i have to fd alot and call a tag before i make it into camp<img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/frown.gif ALT=":(">



    Ok third point you mentioned that some monks in uber guilds where out tanking warriors well that is fine but their are alot more sk's and pallies that can out tank warriors with the same equipment. So if it takes an uber monk to do something that a regular pally or sk can do why did they nerf us? IF they want us to be just a damage dealing class then make us that way rogues blow us away along with most other classes<img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/frown.gif ALT=":("> We are suppossed to be masters of hand to hand combat if we r not supposed to tank then why make all of our aa geared towards it?






    Sarulle 61 monk

    Braxim 55 ranger

    Brazim 50 cleric



    my magelo profile</p>

  7. #7
    Guest

    Default Re: I still have not got answer!



    SK and pal can not outtank a warrior, for two reasons, warriors get defense and they have a lot more hp's, all hybrids can do better is hold taunt better.



    As for game balance, at the beginning it was tanking ability vs damage, the better a class was at surviving a beating the less damage they dished out. In beta it was the wizard that had the highest dps, but that was nerfed when the game went live. Before kunark, the pet classes ruled then when kunark came out the balance was turned upside, and the new rule was the easier a class can move around the less damage they did. Since the pure melee had zero spells to help them get to point A to point B they became the highest dps classes. Now things are starting to head back to the old ways, where some pet classes can do a lot of damage. Mind you a raid monk with top end weapons can still outdamage most casters over the long run.




    </p>

  8. #8
    Enlightened Grandmaster Wubao's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Delaware
    Posts
    612

    Default Re: I still have not got answer!

    "Where do people get the ideal that if a character has magic they need to be subpar, "



    That's an easy one.



    That comes from old MuDs and RPGs and what not.



    Basically it's the battle cleric scenario.



    If your character can fight as well as a warrior and can heal good enough to not need a healer around, then warriors and healers are obsolete. And the game has become gimped.



    So if "knights" and "rangers" could fight monsters in EQ well enough ... tank well enough ... and heal well enough, then the pure healer/priest classes and the pure melee classes would not be needed.



    So yes, because they have magic they SHOULD NOT approach Warrior/Monk DPS or tank as well as a pure melee.



    If anything needs upgrading its their magic. It needs to be more unique and powerful enough to still balance their melee side without making their melee so powerful that they've ruined the melee classes.



    As you can see this is no easy task.



    And for the people at Verant/SOE, who sometimes lack imagination, forethought and the ability to fully understand the game we all play, they tend to not get it right at times.



    -Wu


    Wubao

    Fist of Agnost the Indifferent

    Wubao's Gear

    </p>
    Wubao Fist of Agnost the Indifferent!
    - Read My Articles
    - Follow my blog here
    - See my artwork

  9. #9
    Guest

    Default Re: I still have not got answer!



    In no way were the hybrids ever good enough to heal themselves in a experience grp, so clerics were always needed.



    And at one time magic melee classes were given a experience penalty while some of the pure classes were given a experienc bonus, which is a fairer way to make the classes different then making hybids subpar.



    It just does not make sense that a magic user in a world of magic would be second class to a none magic user. As it is most people who became attracted to this game came from a fantasy back ground from reading books or playing games. So most wanted to play some type of magic user, which explains the amount of rangers and wizards that were seen in the game when it first came out.



    Why did the pure melee became so powerful when kunark came out, simple some people high in verant did not like magic then they found out it is easier to create a game around melee damage then around magic where people will find all types of ways to use it.


    </p>

  10. #10
    Enlightened Grandmaster Wubao's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Delaware
    Posts
    612

    Default Re: I still have not got answer!

    "In no way were the hybrids ever good enough to heal themselves in a experience grp, so clerics were always needed."



    Well, I noticed both my ranger friend and my paladin friend did just fine with heals in their teens. I hear level 60 paladins do alright, healing wise.



    "And at one time magic melee classes were given a experience penalty while some of the pure classes were given a experienc bonus, which is a fairer way to make the classes different then making hybids subpar."



    I disagree. You still have the balance issue when you reach the end of the XP gravy train.



    "It just does not make sense that a magic user in a world of magic would be second class to a none magic user."



    ?

    How so?



    What makes little to no sense is why a ranger or a paladin would be more powerful than a warrior or a monk, in a game that seeks to maintain any semblance of balance.



    It's the classic battle cleric situation.



    If you can fight and heal, to be balanced, you need to fight LESS good than the pure fighters and heal LESS good than the pure healers. Or else there'd be no reason for fighters and healers since everyone would be fighter-healers anyways.



    If this were 8-bit theater, you'd be RED MAGE.



    "As it is most people who became attracted to this game came from a fantasy back ground from reading books or playing games. So most wanted to play some type of magic user, which explains the amount of rangers and wizards that were seen in the game when it first came out."



    I think you're generalizing here.



    I know I for one didn't play this game to play a magic user. I know a few other MONKS and WARRIORS who didn't want to play a magic user, either.



    In fact, I think that's why we all chose the class we chose.



    "Why did the pure melee became so powerful when kunark came out,"



    Because melees were unbalanced when compared with casters.



    "simple some people high in verant did not like magic"



    I find that particularly funny to read. Heh. I've read that statement at least five times now, and it still makes me chuckle as much as the first time I read it.



    "then they found out it is easier to create a game around melee damage then around magic where people will find all types of ways to use it. "



    I think you're too paranoid here.



    It's really very simple. If Paladins could fight as well as monks, and tank as well as warriors, and heal as well as clerics, then everyone would play paladins and these other classes would not exist.



    -Wu


    Wubao

    Fist of Agnost the Indifferent

    Wubao's Gear

    </p>
    Wubao Fist of Agnost the Indifferent!
    - Read My Articles
    - Follow my blog here
    - See my artwork

  11. #11
    Guest

    Default Re: I still have not got answer!

    I dont think you understand what i am saying. Look i will put it this way. verant nerfed the monk because the top end monk could tank as well as a warrior. My point is this.. Their are other classes that can as well. Monks,sk's,pallies and sometimes even rangers could tank as well as warriors.



    Monks are very similiar to warriors in that we have no spells we both could take some damage but the warrior would always be the better choice because they have more hp and they have a taunt button. For that monks get a few special abilities like fd and mend.





    Now you take the sk's and pallies. They hold agro better, have a good amount of hp, their dps is higher than that of a warrior and to top it all of what do they give up for that??? Duel wield! but hey thanks to verant that is not a problem with all the nice 2 hand weapons out now. Now you throw in the fact that they can use magic and you have one very nice character. Much more powerfull than that of a warrior or a monk. I have seen sk's solo stuff that i could not dream off even touching. I have seen pallies take more punishment and control a mob with stuns and spells that would make the most uberist of warriors put their heads down with shame.



    Before you tell me to start a sk or pally i will tell you dont bother. I will not waste another year building up a character only to have verant nerf him. And no one said if they can use magic they have to be subpar, but dont you think that should count for something? Do you see monks using magic soloing dragons in ww? I think that does count for a big plus in class balancing and those of you who tell me different are just kidding themselves.




    Sarulle 61 monk

    Braxim 55 ranger

    Brazim 50 cleric



    my magelo profile</p>

  12. #12
    Guest

    Default Re: I still have not got answer!

    <blockquote>Quote:<hr>verant nerfed the monk because the top end monk could tank as well as a warrior.<hr></blockquote>



    Thats not actually true. What SOE said was something along the lines of Monks were taking less damage overall than Warriors in many situations (you'd have to pull out the exact quote from the patch message, this is only a paraphrase).



    SOE did not ever say, "Top end Monks are tanking far too well so we're going to nerf the entire class". That is something that the Monk community has decided is what they meant. Its not what they said.








    The Man in Black: We are men of action, lies do not become us.

    </p>

  13. #13
    Ascendant Stone Fist
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Posts
    1,138

    Default Uh no they didnt

    "but verant gave the tool's to be the best pullers to monks"



    Uh Frisszen try not to take this the wrong way but your wrong. They did not give us the tools to be the best pullers, WE used the tools they gave us to become the best pullers.



    They (SOE, Verant, Poppa Johns Porn Palace or whatever the hell they are calling themselves this week), have tried like hell to take pulling away from us for over 3 years. But because their coding for Monster AI and Pathing is worse then the fucking invaders in Space Invaders they have thus far failed. They have changed FD numerous times officially and many more times UNofficially.



    So please spare me the THEY gave us speech again. Its one of the more fucking Hypocritical things Rich posted in his "Fuck all monks" post!


    </p>

  14. #14
    Guest

    Default Re: Uh no they didnt



    " WELL I noticed both my ranger friend and paladin friend did just fine with heals in their teens."



    Cheap gear has gimp the low lvl game, at one time the low lvl game was like pop where mobs killed you very fast, and people needed to grp. Even at lvl 60 gear allowed many melee to solo none stop with a fungi tunic, or light healing.



    "WHAT makes little to no sense is why a ranger or paladin would be more powerful than a warrior or monk, in a game that seeks to maintain any semblance of balance"



    What factors do you use to balance the classes. Part of the problem with eq is the factors used to balance the classes keep changing. In the beginning magic was not a factor in balancing the classes it was tanking ability. The better a class could survive a beating the less damage they did. Because of this casters were the big dps guns in the game. In many ways verant is going back to the way it used to be, where magic and casters have a bigger roll in the game.



    Pre kunark the heavy plate melee were fairly balanced between each other, thou they sucked in the dps department. Kunark changed everything, the 3 classes that almost nobody ever played became the kings of the game, for at least a few expansions untill some of the other classes started to catch up to the way it used to be. I just think it funny that the guild leader of the most powerful guild, who had a lot of influence with verant at that time was able to get his class so ubber with kunark.



    Wubao pre kunark rangers were one of the most played melee classes in the game, even thou they suck big time and people used to make a million jokes about them. A pal or sk were not any better then a warrior back then but almost nobody want to play a pure class, most people found the game more enjoyable playing a magic user.



    "I think you're to paranoid here"



    Just look at how many times spells have been nerfed because verant never thought off all the ways people will use those spells. To design a game around melee damage is easy, very few variables, but that can not be said about spells. Do you think verant thought wizards would use MB to take down old world dragons. Kunark and vel was designed for the pure melee where casters started to become rare, and where people gave up characters with over 60 days played to start over as a pure melee. If verant did not fix this tread today you would see a game of pure melee, clerics and the odd caster.



    "it's really very simple. If paladins could fight as well as monks and tank as well as warriors, and heal as well as clerics, then everyone would play paladins and these other classes would not exist"



    Paladins never had a high DPS, or could heal as well as clerics, and since they always had less hp and no defense disc they never could tank as well as warriors. Against gimp mobs sure a paladin could be the healer, but then 6 monks in fungi tunic did not need a healer against gimp mobs.



    " I find that particularly funny to read. Heh I've read that statement at least five times now, and it still makes me chuckle as much as the first time I read it."



    The reason I said that, is because when kunark came out they turned the game upside down. They changed the the factor to balance the classes from the ability to take a beating in a grp to the ability to travel from point A to B. The easier a class was able to move around by using ports, sow, invisability or heals the less damage they were able to do in grps. Because of this all the pure melee classes got a huge boast in power while the magic user classes became second class citizens for a few years. But time changes everything and the hybrid melee have improved a lot, but it took years of complaining, and asking why.



    Pre kunark wizard suck big time and everyone was laughing at rangers, but when the expansion came out these classes were not improved. What they did do is set up a stupid port system and a no rent key for seb so grps had to ask a porter and a tracker to group with them to make the journey a lot shorter. Of course over time this all changed for the better.



    It all comes down to what criterion you use to judge what is balance between the classes, and when this game came out magic was not the factor they used. People who played this game for a long time remember how it was, how it became and how it is going back to the way it used to be. So people who started this game after kunark came out where pure melee ruled might be confused at the way verant balances the classes.



    This game is a group game, verant wants people to group together not solo, so what a class can do outside a grp should have very little bearing on what they can do inside the group. Thanks to pop verant has forced many classes back to grouping which is a lot more fun then going solo all the time.



    The one downside to this is that some of the very important support classes are rare compared to the amount of damage dealing classes out there. So ench and cleric find it easy to get grps where some rangers in my guild have spent over 6 hours looking for a grp. By the way ench and clerics have a few nice perks to attact more people to play them, can u say charm or melee cleric.



    SOE said that monks were taking less damage then warriors in many situations. The trouble with this is that against certain mobs the warrior extra hp's was less important then the less damage that monks were taking, making monks easier to keep alive in a ch chain then warriors. Or at least that what furor seems to be complaining about.




    </p>

  15. #15
    SkyKungfu
    Guest

    Default Re: Uh no they didnt

    Tib sometimes you really impress me bro ! LoL, funny post <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/glasses.gif ALT="8)">



    Glatius:



    <blockquote>Quote:<hr>At this point we donít think that we have achieved what we wanted with Monks. Right now it seems to be having too much of an impact on Monks who arenít the top 5%. Weíll be going back and looking into it some more.

    <hr></blockquote>



    So I dont think it was just the monk comunity assuming that high end uber monks tank ability in some cases made them nerf the class. The above statement is from Absor JFY.



    Frisszen I didn't know that a Fungi tunic is a class definic abilty for monks ...



    <blockquote>Quote:<hr>This game is a group game, verant wants people to group together not solo, so what a class can do outside a grp should have very little bearing on what they can do inside the group. Thanks to pop verant has forced many classes back to grouping which is a lot more fun then going solo all the time.<hr></blockquote>



    So thats why Druids and Wizards (not that I care) still can quad kite and LOTS of other calsses can better solo than monks. I assume thats also why SOE gives out free account keys encouraging people to double boxing?





    Sky






    </p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/bmonklybusiness43508.showUserPublicProfile?gid=sky kungfu>SkyKungfu</A> at: 12/1/02 2:17:24 am

  16. #16
    Guest

    Default Re: Uh no they didnt



    True dky, but with a fungi at high lvl's a monk was able to solo just as well as a paladin pre pop.



    Most people who duel box, play a melee and a healer of some type. As for wizards they were designed as a grouping class except they were nerfed so bad when the game came out that verant starting to add a few spells that allowed wizards to solo. Why should anyone care what a class can do outside a grp the only concern you should have is what a class can do for a grp.


    </p>

  17. #17
    Guest

    Default Re: Uh no they didnt

    <blockquote>Quote:<hr>So I dont think it was just the monk comunity assuming that high end uber monks tank ability in some cases made them nerf the class. The above statement is from Absor JFY.<hr></blockquote>



    Well SOE hasn't been specific. Its not unreasonable to conclude (at least thats what I concluded) that because the majority of Monks with significant complaints are non-uber Monks that perhaps the change impacted them more than what was intended. However, SOE hasn't said that. They've said they didn't get the exact results intended. For all we know this may mean they meant to nerf Monks even more and failed (although I doubt it).



    But maybe I'm misremembering. Feel free to show me the quote from a SOE representive that clearly states that high end Monks tank too well and therefore the entire class needs to be nerfed. Frankly you guys have arrived at a lot of conclussions based on very little information. You yourselves complain about the lack of communication but then seem to completely know what SOE meant to do and how they screwed up and so on.



    You ASSUME the target was only high end Monks. You don't know that, unless you have some secret squirrel hidden communications with the dev staff that you haven't shared.


    The Man in Black: We are men of action, lies do not become us.

    </p>

  18. #18
    Guest

    Default Re: Uh no they didnt

    <blockquote>Quote:<hr>They (SOE, Verant, Poppa Johns Porn Palace or whatever the hell they are calling themselves this week)<hr></blockquote>



    har har har you r a gud munk



    (I'm CJ today. Don't ask why I just am)


    <hr />
    <div style="text-align:center">I'm a male monk with a womanly attitude? WTF?! (click for Magelo)
    </div></p>

  19. #19
    Ex-Druid Monk-in-Training
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    50

    Default Re: Uh no they didnt

    Got sucked into some comparisons while skimming through the "post your profile here" threads on the warrior boards.

    Here's the averages...(note: not even trying to sort out twinks or high end gear. just found 10 characters of the required levels and averaged the totals out. With monks being the "twink class of choice" I would expect the totals to be somewhat slanted)



    level 50 monks 936ac 1658hp 1190 base hp

    level 50 warr 1081ac 2729hp 1952 base hp



    Monks at level 50 have 86.5% of warriors ac, 60.7% of hp's with a base hp figure of 60.9% of a warriors.

    (note: the ac value is a bit off since all but 2 of the monk sample were Iskar.)



    level 60 monks 1131ac 2775hp 1592 base hp

    level 60 warr.. 1203ac 3933hp 2563 base hp



    Monks at level 60 have 94% of warriors ac, 70.5% of hp's with a base hp figure of 62.1% of a warriors.



    level 65 monks 1363ac 4210hp 1829 base hp

    level 65 warr.. 1313ac 5455hp 2887 base hp



    Monks at level 65 have 103% of warriors ac, 77.1% of hp's with a base hp figure of 63.3% of a warriors.



    The only reason I found this interesting was the connection between the base hp and total hp.

    Base hp advantage only dropped by 2.4% while the total hp dropped by 16.4%. (the ac advantage of warriors also dropped by 16.5%, an interesting connection to gear choices up to level 65) Lots of good ac/ hp gear after level 50.



    Oh well, just found curve from 50 - 65 interesting



    <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Right now it seems to be having too much of an impact on Monks who aren't the top 5%<hr></blockquote>



    From this post by absor.

    pub35.ezboard.com/fmonkly...=801.topic



    <blockquote>Quote:<hr>You ASSUME the target was only high end Monks. You don't know that, unless you have some secret squirrel hidden communications with the dev staff that you haven't shared<hr></blockquote>



    No, no secret squirrel, just a posting you missed. Granted, before that 'official' posting it was all speculation that has now been confirmed by a SoE rep.



    Edit: removed sig.


    </p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/bmonklybusiness43508.showUserPublicProfile?gid=gan jin@monklybusiness43508>Ganjin</A> at: 12/1/02 3:36:19 pm

  20. #20
    Guest

    Default Re: Uh no they didnt

    <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Right now it seems to be having too much of an impact on Monks who aren't the top 5%<hr></blockquote>



    Which means they hit the lower 95% too hard (it seems). But that would also leave open the conclusion that they intended to hit the lower 95% of Monks as well as the top 5%. Otherwise it would have said something more like, "Right now it seems to be impacting the lower 95% of Monks, which wasn't our intention."



    My conclusion, they intended to nerf Monks across the board. However, the results were more dramatic than intended except for those Monks in the top 5%.














    The Man in Black: We are men of action, lies do not become us.

    </p>

  21. #21
    Enlightened Grandmaster Wubao's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Delaware
    Posts
    612

    Default bangs head against wall one last time

    Fine Fris, you win. Whatever. Your entire post is based on this mythical Pre-Kunark era.



    I could get into an argument with you about it, but it's pointless.



    Why?



    Because pre-Kunark has nothing to do with anything. Fungi tunics have nothing to do with anything. The way you perceive the game as changing since Beta doesn't really support your topic at all.



    Because it still does not change the fact that BATTLE-CLERICS are not balanced.



    A WARRIOR who uses MAGIC has to be weaker than a warrior who does not. Or else the warrior who does not will be obsolete and pointless.



    Thus, HYBRIDS have to be balanced against that.



    It takes place in pen and paper RPGs, it takes place in other MMORPGs, it takes place in just about every fantasy related game I've seen.



    If wizards could use swords AND toss fireballs at monsters, no one would play a character that could just use swords.



    Everything else you've said is confusing to me, not because I didn't play pre-kunark, but because it has nothing to do with what you were originally talking about or what I responded to.



    -Wu


    </p>
    Wubao Fist of Agnost the Indifferent!
    - Read My Articles
    - Follow my blog here
    - See my artwork

  22. #22
    Guest

    Default Re: I still have not got answer!

    Yah, Paladins and Shadow Knights can steal the agro away from a warrior. this is true. The question though is why would we want to? Trust me, it really irritates me when I have to back off a mob and turn off my attack because it turns on me and the warrior can't get agro, and with High end mobs, the warrior loosing agro like this can wipe a whole raid out in seconds. Agro control is something that is a chalenge not only for the Tank that is taunting but for the other tanks and casters as well, in other words the fact that Hybrid spells generate agro is more of a curse then it is a boon for the Hybrids.



    hybrids pay other prices for casting spells as well, not only are we dependant on mana, but we loose Damage Output to our casting time. I can easily loose 600 in melee damage in the time I cast a stun spell. And in group and raid situations many of our spells are rendered useless due to them being dumbed down versions of our parent classes. Meaning we are unable to use our full abilities. Our base stats also suffer in regards to Melee abilities for our spells, for example a Monk gets 30 points spreas between Str, Sta, Agi and Dex whereas a paladin only gets 15 in Str and Sta and the other 15 in Wis and Char, our gear is similairly spread out between melee and casting stats.



    Hybrids also get sucky disiplins, in fact most of their disiplines are jokes.



    As for Hybrids out-damaging Monks, thats laughable. Only the Ranger come close to what Warriors put out damage wise. Paladins and Shadowknights are very low on the melee damage table, even with their best weapons.



    Pointing out that Paladins and SKs can easily take tanking positions is also skewered. We were meant to take those type of Tanking positions. A Paladin and a Shadow Knight are Tanks, we were meant to do everything that a warrior could, but just not as well. We are meant to have high AC and high HPs and be able to stand our own and play the role of Main Tank, however Warriors were meant to be able to specialise in these areas and be the "best" tank.



    Hybrids are sub par because while we can play both roles we cannot do either as well as the "Parent Classes can". Hybrids are sub par to Warriors because we do less damage, with out best weapons a Paladin or SK can maybe do 75% of the damage that an average warrior does. With our best melee equipement a Paladin or SK can be Main Tain, but we have less AC, Lower Melee Stats (str, agi, dex, etc) less Hit Points, no Defensive Disiplines, Lower Skill Caps in Dodge, Parry and repose etc. Thats the price we pay to be able to cast lower level spells with a cast time and mana penalty (hey at level 55 I get a level 5 Cleric spell, yay!)



    Now even I will admit that the nerfs turned out to be too harsh. This is a fact that Verant has admitted too and has stated that the results were much harsher then intended. And that they would further tune them to account for the low end and average equiped Monks


    Kahm Fierceheart

    Tunare Luvin Knight of 56 Seasons in the service of King Thex

    Officer of Avantgarde, on Vallon-Zek

    My Profile</p>

  23. #23
    Ex-Druid Monk-in-Training
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    50

    Default Re: I still have not got answer!

    LoL.



    Sorry kahm, finding it hard to believe you can loose 600pts in melee damage by casting a 2.00 sec spell. Even with a hasted windblade..



    If you are, allow me to aid you in that regard. Here's a quote from the palladin's board.



    <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Also...let me explain something about casting spells in melee, which seems to cause a bit of confusion for those who are new to playing a hybrid class. The timer which counts off in between your sword swings (or bow shots) is NOT stopped when you cast spells. So...if you cast a spell JUST AFTER you swing your sword, and the casting time of the spell is shorter than the delay timer of the weapon, you have no loss of speed in your attacks. Get that timing down and cast stuns or Flash of Light or whatever else is appropriate in between attacks!



    Advanced Lesson: the Tab button can be used to toggle back and forth between you and the mob quickly. There are many uses to put this knowledge to, but one of my favorites is the Tab-Heal. Say you're soloing, and you're losing the hit point race? You can heal yourself in between swings with little to no loss of speed in your attack, depending on the delay of your weapon and the casting time of the particular spell you're using. Here's an example to show how it's done:



    I'm fighting a Voracious Brute in the Dreadlands. It conned blue, so I figured it was a safe bet, but it's a bit tougher than I had figured on and I didn't enter the fight at full health to begin with. While he's got me down to only a bubble of health, he's still got over 2 bubbles, and the way this fight's going I'm not going to make it.



    1. I patiently wait for my next sword swing then immediately hit Tab. My mouse is already hovering over the Greater Heal spell icon and I click that too, as fast as I can.



    2. I'm using a Tantor's Tusk (50 damage / 60 delay), and I have a Flowing Black Silk Sash (21% haste) and I'm buffed with Valor of Marr (25% haste), for a total of 46% haste. 60 / 1.46 = 41.09589. This is the new adjusted delay of my weapon, it will swing every 4.1 seconds. The casting time of Greater Heal is 3.75 seconds...shorter than my delay, so I lose no time off my next swing.



    3. I pray to Tunare to let me channel through the Brute's attacks to get this spell off. If he interrupts me, I'll restart the spell immediately after my next swing.



    4. WHILE THE SPELL IS CASTING, I re-target the mob. The Heal still hits me, but the target for the next swing has already been re-established as the mob.



    5. I just healed myself 270 points withouts slowing my attacks at all. While this made a big difference, I'm still behind where I need to be in hit points.



    6. I wait patiently through the next swing, my spells are grayed out for the next couple of seconds, so I'll get one more swing in then try for another heal.



    Using this method, I can keep going until I'm Out Of Mana, but the beast will be dead long before that.

    Deezle Suture - 54th Paladin of Tunare - West Freeport Public Enemy Number One<hr></blockquote>



    Paladins of Norrath is just full of handy tips for paladins...

    Unless my math is really off you could be hasted up to 80% and still be able to cast stun between swings. ( the 2.00 sec cast ones are the slowest by the spell list on casters realm.)


    </p>

  24. #24
    Guest

    Default Re: I still have not got answer!

    Glatius:



    <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Which means they hit the lower 95% too hard (it seems). But that would also leave open the conclusion that they intended to hit the lower 95% of Monks as well as the top 5%. Otherwise it would have said something more like, "Right now it seems to be impacting the lower 95% of Monks, which wasn't our intention."



    My conclusion, they intended to nerf Monks across the board. However, the results were more dramatic than intended except for those Monks in the top 5%.<hr></blockquote>



    Really the way it was stated...it could of gone eitherway imo. He didn't exactly say they meant to hit the average monk in anything but a subtle way. However I don't think the post was designed to be read that much into. Either way the point is, monks should have something coming to them. Also imho, magic is pleanty unblanced now vs the pure melees. So I think all pure melees should recieve an upgrade; in particular monks.






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

  25. #25
    Ascendant Stone Fist
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    1,962

    Default Re: I still have not got answer!

    That's all nice, I have a different perspective then a lot of Monks on here though it seems.



    55, unguilded, gear is about what you'd expect as such, though I do play a lot. So no VT gear, SSHS/T-Staff/no Fungi, etc. Got a 53 Shammie bot as well, I almost never group. Usually it's only because I feel like it, or sometimes because I feel sorry for that SK/Pal/whatever who's been LFG for hours. Most of the SK's/Pals I'm grouping with aren't weilding WB, they are more likely using a SoP or equivalent. They are lucky to sustain more melee DPS then my Shammy with his JBB, if they even match it. Sk/Pallie melee in the groups I've been in does not come close to mine. I'm pretty sure it stays that way until you start getting into the PoP era weapons, though Axe of Dismay and a few others do a pretty good bite of damage.



    The current problem boils down to class dilution. Pre-Kunark, you knew the Warrior was going to be the MT on a raid. SK's/Pals could tank in EXP groups, Rangers in a pinch if you had a Cleric and a backup healer /smirk. Monks? You were better off having the Shaman tank. Then Kunark came out. Warriors had a much harder time with equipment. Pallie Helm that casts daring ran around 1/10 the price of a Cobalt Helm. The SK armor was cheeeeeeep compared to Cobalt. Iksar Monks came out with high AC. All of a sudden Warriors couldn't hardly do their job because they couldn't hold taunt, and their AC usually lagged. SK's and Pallies became in most situations better then a Warrior because they could hold taunt better. I didn't hunt Seb much with my Necro, but the few times I did things went great with SK tanks, I had to work to get agro (and remember this is with a Necro heh), with Warriors I had to work to NOT get agro. And Monks were dealing so much damage that Warriors could still have agro problems (would have been nice if we had gotten decent weapon upgrades between Kunark and PoP SOE).



    Velious didn't change that much, added a few new weapons for SK's/Pallies, made it easier to get Warrior armor. Warriors started to catch back up and be better tanks again, mostly due to their AC catching up and innate MR/HP.



    Then Luclin came out. With the high-end gear where avoidance is the name of the game assuming you can get to a minimum HP level, Monks started to really shine. Even below that top tier or 2, with the amount of melee damage MOB's were doing, Monks started to be good MT's in EXP groups due to our avoidance. And weapons started showing up that made Warriors/SK's/Pallies close most if not all of the DPS gap.



    SOE saw that (though the biggest gripes were over the upper-tiered Monks), and decided to put things back in order by nerfing our mitigation. They went a bit far for most levels, but in all honesty for the most part Monks were spoiled. We were able to be viable tanks 2-4 levels before a Warrior would have been a good tank for that MOB/camp. I haven't equipped my Warrior since I took a hiatus and had cancelled my accounts (destroyed all his shiznit before leaving hoping it would keep me away). But I know prior to that, my Warrior did really well in KC. At 52-53. He did really well in Seb at 53-55. He did really well in VL at 54-55. However my Monk was able to be a viable tank in all those places several levels lower. My Monk/BL combo were doing Chardok zone-in/out in their high-40's, and that's with 100HP BL heals and her 30% slow...



    SOE still hasn't addressed the other side of the equation either. Monks were tanking (no scratch that, avoiding damage) better then most Plate classes in EXP groups. Still didn't make them the best tank due to no taunt and lessened CH effectiveness. But made them viable. Now with the nerf that's no longer the case in a normal group. But what about all the things they did to increase SK/War/Pal DPS to put them more on a level with Monks at the high end? SOE thought Monks were tanking too well and encroaching on Plate Classes "roles" and "fixed" that. Now "fix" our weapons or our damage tables so that we can have our niche back please.





    But as far as our value in small groups...

    I've heard lots from the people affected by this nerf. I understand your frustration. But the griping now should be on our DPS keeping a consistent advantage from L1 to L65, not from L1 to L60. I know slow is a huge advantage, but I was duoing L53-54 Tachnians and L52-54 Rats in PoD at 55 with my L52 Shammy (still there, great EXP per kill). We've duoed in PoI, PoD, and romp through PoJ. I'm sure it would have been a lot easier pre-nerf. Even though these are slowed, when you're doing a MOB that can double and bash for over 600 a round, having 583 HP heals means you need to have avoidance. Mitigation only goes so far. If I group with a similar level Pallie or SK, and my Shammy bot is our healer, I generally do what I can to hold agro, because I tank more efficiently then they do. In a group with a Cleric, you bet your butt I'm dumping agro onto someone else (preferably the Tanks not the Shammy/Cleric heh). But Monk tanking isn't dead. Monks being good MT's in high-level EXP groups is.



    Took my Shammy back to KC to get him to 53. Yes I know a 55 Plate class would have done well there. But I pwned those MOB's. We did Jail for a while. We did RCY. We did LCY. If the Hand hadn't been camped we would have done it. Monks can still tank in most zones where stuff hits for under 200. Heck Monks can tank stuff hitting for 280+. It's when it starts getting the 350 on up hitters that our inherent HP differences+the nerf make it hurt for us. But get too much higher hitting and you're almost back to the original problem where our avoidance starts helping us out again. From what I'm hearing Monks aren't able to solo Bats easily in the real low 50's anymore. Other then SK's (grats VI on the free life-tap armor), not too many melee classes can. If VI came out with a Monk-usable Wavecrasher equivalent we'd still solo pre-60 at least as good as Warriors/Pallies..


    </p>

  26. #26
    Ascendant Stone Fist
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Posts
    1,138

    Default Re: I still have not got answer!

    Truth is with the slow landed and the other mobs mezzed an asmatic Unswerving Hammer of Faith that spent the previous night carousing can main tank if it wanted to (ok, this is a blatent exageration but you get my point). Its Pointless to argue about who can do what. Just because I can tank a level 61 mob for the 10 seconds it takes for the Shaman to finally land the slow doesnt mean Im making warriors obsolete. Guess what Sparky? Their aint a warrior in the group. If there was I would have immediatly feigned and let him take the aggro and saved my stonestance and mend for the hissy fit the mob throws before it dies.



    Taking away our ability to solo was WRONG. If they really wanted to make people group you would be placed in a group when you logged in! Im pretty sure thats the next step though.


    </p>

  27. #27
    Guest

    Default Re: I still have not got answer!

    Ganjin: 600 damage is easy to do in the time to cast a 2 second stun, thats about 3 hits with a hasted Windblade (easy to do, especially with Double attack). Actually my cast time on my high end stuns are 2.5 to 3.5 seconds, plus my cast time penalty, and spells like superior heal take 4.5 seconds plus penalty (not including the time taken to switch targets). Also that advice on Paladins of Norath is wrong and outdated as well. "4. WHILE THE SPELL IS CASTING, I re-target the mob. The Heal still hits me, but the target for the next swing has already been re-established as the mob."

    You can't retarget the mob or change targets while casting spells. And Greater heal is 3.75 (PLUS the Cast Time Penalty) seconds, making it more like 5+ second cast time. Add in a fizzle or interupt and your basically screwed. Only an idiot would stand toe to toe with a mob and get their brains beat out trying to heal themselves, A Paladin would Root, back off to a safe distance, heal themselves, then move back into the fray. and idealy would have a hotkey set up that targets themselves and casts heal (/target Kahm, /cast 1).



    Stun spells and heals aren't just cast at my leisure either, they are cast when needed. ie when I cast heal to save the group's enchanter or cleric or Monk from getting killed I don't wait to time it to my swings or they likely will die, and stuns are mostly used to interupt casters, or stop a mobs movements, meaning I cast stun when the Mob tries to cast a spell (like CH or Gate), or when it bolts and runs.



    Thats the primary reason for our weapon delay timers not reseting themselves when Hybrids cast spells, it's to reduce the loss of melee damage when casting, but it doesn't entirely negate it, especially in the case of long cast times and low delay weapons, this of course doesn't factor in Fizzles, Resists and Interupts.I'm not complaining about hybrid DPS, I am pointing out that we do pay to cast these spells and that hybrids don't come close to Monks in DPS.





    "So let me get this straight a pure melee class like monks should not be able to tank as well as a warrior but classes that have magic can be even better at it and thats ok? What are you people thinking?"



    First Answer: Monks weren't nerfed just because they were comparable to Warriors in Tanking ability, they were nerfed because they were comparable to Plate classes (Paladins, SKs and Warriors). Paladins and SKs and to a lesser extent Rangers are supposed to be able to tank.



    Second Answer: Hybrids DO NOT tank better then Warriors.



    Third Answer: Taunt and Agro control is an intirely different issue. Hybrids get Taunt at a lower skill cap then Warriors, and don't get the Area Taunt AA Skill. We also do less damage and don't duel weild and have for the most part slower weapons then a Warrior which plays a big factor holding agro. Yes Hybrids get spells that can generate Agro, which is fine when they are Main Tank and want the agro, however, when someone else is the Main Tank, those spells still generate Agro when we don't want agro. Hybrids and Monks stealing the agro from a Warrior is a Bad thing, for the most part groups can control agro so I don't see this as a problem.



    "They can out tank us and alot of the times they can even out hit us <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/frown.gif ALT=":("> Um can anyone out there give me a reason that makes any sense why we where nerfed?"



    First Answer: Again, Hybrids are supposed to outtank Monks, thats part of the reason of the Nerf.



    Second Answer: Hybrids can't out hit Monks. Paladins and SKs can maybe do 75% of the DPS of a Warrior, if we have some of our best weapons. Paladin and SK only weapons are rare compared to other Melee classes.



    This isn't to say that I entirely agree with the Monk nerf. I too think it went to far and was unbalanced to Low end and lower level monks, and should be readjusted to balance it acccordingly. I just disagree with the comparison to hybrids.


    Kahm Fierceheart

    Tunare Luvin Knight of 56 Seasons in the service of King Thex

    Officer of Avantgarde, on Vallon-Zek

    My Profile</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/bmonklybusiness43508.showUserPublicProfile?gid=kah m>kahm</A> at: 12/3/02 1:44:25 am

  28. #28
    Enlightened Grandmaster Wubao's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Delaware
    Posts
    612

    Default BAH!

    "thats about 3 hits with a hasted Windblade (easy to do, especially with Double attack). "



    According to MOST paladins, you guys MISS too much to do that much damage with the Windblade!



    :P



    I'm a keep throwing that back at paladins everytime they mention that evil, evil weapon.



    ;-)

    Wu


    </p>
    Wubao Fist of Agnost the Indifferent!
    - Read My Articles
    - Follow my blog here
    - See my artwork

  29. #29
    Guest

    Default Re: BAH!

    funny, warriors vs pal/sk, same tier of weap sk/pal wins every time in raw melee. If neither of you are tanking, than you dont need to cast spells.


    Ellyrie Flameweaver

    * Video Games don't cause violence.. Gengis Kahn didnt have a nintendo.</p>

  30. #30
    Guest

    Default Re: BAH!

    Actually Balaeriphon, thats wrong, we don't and physically can't beat a Warrior with the same Tier of weapon in raw melee, this is a physical impossibility for several reasons:



    One: Warrior Skill Caps are significantly higher. Thus a Pally/SK will miss far more often the a Warrior.



    Two: Warriors can Duel Wield, meaning we can only compare our damage output with the same weapons if both are using 2-handers. Comparing 1 Handers is pointless since a Warrior adds his off hand weapon as well.



    Three: Warriors have significantly higher Strength, Dexterity and Agility which directly effects their Base Attack, Double Attack, Triple Attack, Repose, Weapon Damage, Weapon Procs, and Critical Hits.



    Four: Warriors get more Weapons to Chose from and Better Weapons. Paladins and Shadow Knights get a smaller selection of weapons to choose from, most of which the Warrior also can use. The Warriors get better far better weapons at the same tier then Hybrids do.



    As an additional note, If we are Tanking or not Tanking doesn't matter for casting spells, We cast heals to save party members and we cast stuns to interupt spell casters and we root mobs to stop them from running etc etc. So yes spell casting will always effect our melee damage.



    heh, your right about that missing thing, but I wasn't intending to say that 600 damage was what I lost each time I cast a spell, I was giving an example of how much damage I could loose when casting a spell, and I admit that this is a high, but plausible estimate. This is something that a Caster/Melee has to consider when casting spells is how much Melee Damage they loose during casting. For example, I cast a stun spell, 108 DD in 3 seconds (4.5 seconds with Penalty) so I have to consider if this is worth casting while I am in melee. My average melee hit is for 150 and I'm very likely to hit at least once during that cast time, so therefore it's a waste of mana to cast it during melee. Now it's possible for me to hit it twice dure that cast time, and I hit for about 270 max, and I can Double attack each time. I'll factor in my Weapon timer not reseting and remove half of the second attack (if the weapon timer is done while I'm still casting, I still wait for the casting to stop before I attack) thats a total of about 800 damage potentially lost, plus 4 chances to proc Divine Might for 65 DD each. I should also add that when you are hit while casting, you don't Parry, Dodge or Repose.



    Again, I'm not complaining about our Melee or Tanking ability, I'm just saying that our damage shouldn't be compared to a Warrior or a Monk, and nor should we be compared to how well we Tank vs a Warrior. The Issue wasn't Monk vs Warrior Tanking, it was Monk vs Plate Classes Tanking. And I whole heartedly agree that Monks should be doing the most damage.


    Kahm Fierceheart

    Tunare Luvin Knight of 56 Seasons in the service of King Thex

    Officer of Avantgarde, on Vallon-Zek

    My Profile</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/bmonklybusiness43508.showUserPublicProfile?gid=kah m>kahm</A> at: 12/3/02 5:00:43 pm

  31. #31
    Monk Disciple
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    224

    Default Re: BAH!

    Actually, an equivalent tier Knight weapon will beat the tar out of an equivalent tier dual wielding weapon in ratio. That's what he was referring to. (24/22 compared to 12/19ish? No familar with Dual Wielders' weapons, I am)



    Was he referring to MELEE DAMAGE? No. Warriors and other pure melee damage classes own our arses in that department because we miss so f'ing much.



    I have about a 40 percent miss rate in melee, 59 ranger buff on constantly. Average DPS is 31ish, including melee damage and procs. Assume that goes up to 51 against undead because I have Dawncaller (125/tick dot against undead).



    The only way I can even look at a warrior's DPS funny is if Dawncaller procs early and continues to proc through an entire fight. Realistically, that happens once every 5 undead mobs. Proc = unreliable.



    And, yes, you can tab, cast on self, and tab retarget during casting. I do it often. And last I checked, we have no cast time penalty. What it says under "Your casting time" is what you get. We do get our defensive skills applied during casting; I have parried, dodged, and riposted while casting.



    1000 damage for me, assumes I'm using my damage weapon and casting QWoT. And I NEVER EVER get max hits 4 times running, and double attacking twice running is not as common as ya think; 2.3 second delay, I have, max haste.. >_< If I'm stunning, it means my aggro is more important than my damage, so I could care less how much damage I lose, as long as the mob doesn't turn to beat on Cat or Dawn. If I'm not tanking, I'm not stunning, it's as simple as that. QWoT is worth it more for the potential 10 second stun than for the 108 damage. (Edit: Your profile shows a windblade. How do you lose 600 damage during a 2 second stun, when, at 100 percent haste, it's a 2.2 second delay weapon?)



    Knight class weapons have far far higher ratios at the same tier than warrior weapons. Could you give me an example of weapons inferior to warrior weapons?



    Oh, and Balaeriphon, you suck. <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/wink.gif ALT=";)">


    Dalantia Silverwing

    Knight Protector of Catwalkk and Dawnlin Silverwing, 57th Defense, Third Blessing, Unguilded



    Kendriel Truthspeaker

    Dedicated of the Silent Fist, 36th Rank, Myst Weavers

    Fennin Ro

    "Putting a finger between us means losing the hand.. or maybe even the arm before you think to pull it back.."</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub35.ezboard.com/bmonklybusiness43508.showUserPublicProfile?gid=dal antia>Dalantia</A> at: 12/3/02 5:57:48 pm
    Gallant Dalantia
    The Valorous Gentle Guardian
    The Peerless Redeemed Heart
    The Softest Touch
    Valiant Archinlar
    Zhuge Jiang
    All on Virtue, City of Heroes

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
  •