Why do Monks always get Ignored and continue to WAIT? [Archive]

Derang

04-28-2009, 01:12 AM

I am sick of waiting for something to happen to our class, like why cant the devs make it possible for us to tank large encounters or hard hitting encounters?!Wait im even more sick of seeing HEALERS!!! Parse 10,000+!! YES 10K+ to make it worse 10k+ Raid trash ZONEWIDES!I am so sick of waiting! Which #@$%!*$ Dev do I need to pay a bonus check to START CHANGING SOMETHING!Our class maxes out ca's with legendary loot, our hit rates are PATHETIC, our aa's are just enough deserve our class to be removed from this game!!! Their are so many reasons why we deserve some changes its nice to see NO RESPONSES, NONE!!!!! From Devs, TY FOR BETTER COMMUNICATION!!! How did you all get your jobs....it makes me sick wasting a lot of our time struggling...I dunno i felt that one of us Monks had to say something serious because we are a dying useless class and im sick of making excuses in raids to keep my spot, very unconsistent dps and not being able to hold hate on large amounts of adds and taking hits from avatars or high end raid nameds. I dont think they have any clue how hard it is for us to reach a 10k zonewide...Just sick of it and done wasting my time, but seriously I thought id just say Thank You for making EXCUSES not to push changes forward for our class, acutally I just need to point you out Aeralik! Thanks for making your class over powered! Thanks for messing up every classes dps! Thankyou for ignoring us about everything we say! Thankyou for doing your job! .......................Thankyou for doing NOTHING!!

Lethe5683

04-28-2009, 01:22 AM

It's because they are either indecisive due to conflicting class views by brawlers, (some want to tank raids, others want to be scouts). Or most likely it could be that they are simply incompetant....

Couching

04-28-2009, 01:34 AM

I second OP's post.Monks got totally ignored by developers in TSO. We had sent a lot of feedback since TSO beta and nothing changed.Our dps in garbage.Our survivability is garbage.Our AoE aggro/dps is garbage.The only reason I still play this game is the friendship from my guild, not this garbage content.There are enough posts of constructive feedback and still, useless. It falls to deaf's ear.Aeralik already knew what problems we suffered but he refused to fix it because his fighter revamp was cancelled.It's really sad that a lot of good monks left this game just because the incompetent and irresponsible developers.

Couching

04-28-2009, 01:37 AM

<cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote>It's because they are either indecisive due to conflicting class views by brawlers, (some want to tank raids, others want to be scouts). Or most likely it could be that they are simply incompetant....</blockquote>It has nothing to do with a unified voice.Look at monk TSO aa, full of junk. If your reason was true, at least we can get some useful dps or tanking aa. None exists.Meditative healing is garbage. When bruiser and other plate tanks can tank TSO raid content with significant less crit mitigation, monk is totally shafted.Our peel aa is another biggest joke because it didn't work on 99% tso raid targets. Seriously, since SoE made peel useless in TSO raid, why did SoE give us aa to enhance a garbage? Are developers out of their mind?Our heal aa is useless when we get TSO set gear. Why? Why give us redauntant aa and set bonus? Is it really that hard to give us a useful aa or useful set bonus?Our bob and weave is another garbage. Even green mobs can still hit through it, not to say raid mobs with strikethrough.Our mit stance is the only not that garbage tank aa, but still, the reuse timer of iron stance is way too long to make this aa really useful.For our dps aa, just one word: junk. They don't even deserve me to type why they suck so much.

Lethe5683

04-28-2009, 01:41 AM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote>It's because they are either indecisive due to conflicting class views by brawlers, (some want to tank raids, others want to be scouts). Or most likely it could be that they are simply incompetant....</blockquote>It has nothing to do with a unified voice.Look at monk TSO aa, full of junk. If your reason was true, at least we can get some useful dps or tanking aa. None exist. Meditative healing is garbage. When bruiser and other plate tanks can tank TSO raid content with significant less crit mitigation, monk is totally shafted, not to say our dps. It's just a joke. </blockquote>My post was worded badly but I did say the most likely reason is because the devs are simply incompetant.

Derang

04-28-2009, 01:58 AM

The whole design of the Brawlers in todays expansion is so #@$%^ UP. That should be enough reason for them to change us to give us a REASON and POINT to PLAY!!!Your right though they are incompetant and you know what makes me laugh at the PATHETIC answers and excuses they give us, and im sorry how hard is it to ask all of the Brawlers or read our posts/feedback to get something started.They seriously need to sit down and rethink our class, because they arnt getting the big question in their THICK HEADED SKULLS, or it PASSING OVER THERE HEAD!

Editedmind

04-28-2009, 05:39 AM

Chill out guys. The best you can achieve is getting the thread locked (probably late, since this seems like a forgotten corner of the forum) and then nobody on the dev team will care anyway.Monks have been getting nerfed since the game started, and I don't think that's about to change. I think somewhere along the line some people started to confuse nerfs for progress in development, or fixes for problems. They're not. They just make things suck, and they make the gameplay experience for the player that much more tedious.The best and most interactive dev response I've yet seen was from TSO beta, to explain the nerf to our only group/raid buff, which went along the lines of "Monks aren't supposed to be known for a decent speed buff." which was more of a kick in the face than anything close to helpful or considerate. So you all want more of that?Frankly I would be happier if devs just stoped touching the class. Time and time again it's just been messed up and stuff is turned into sub-par versions of what other classes have. If they can't fix it, don't ask them to.

Quicksilver74

04-28-2009, 09:24 AM

<cite>Deranged wrote:</cite><blockquote>Wait im even more sick of seeing HEALERS!!! Parse 10,000+!! YES 10K+ to make it worse 10k+ Raid trash ZONEWIDES!</blockquote>See, now here is a fine example of somoene calling for nerfs without knowing the facts. Yes some healers are able to parse 10K on some trash mobs, but do you know why? They have high end gear, are specced for dps, and have a raid supporting them to kill the mob that fast. When a healer puts up those kind of numbers, everyone else in the raid is likely parsing that high too or higher. I'm sure a brawler in that raid is parsing 12K or higher for that trash mob.

Couching

04-28-2009, 09:58 AM

<cite>Crabbok@The Bazaar wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Deranged wrote:</cite><blockquote>Wait im even more sick of seeing HEALERS!!! Parse 10,000+!! YES 10K+ to make it worse 10k+ Raid trash ZONEWIDES!</blockquote>See, now here is a fine example of somoene calling for nerfs without knowing the facts. Yes some healers are able to parse 10K on some trash mobs, but do you know why? They have high end gear, are specced for dps, and have a raid supporting them to kill the mob that fast. When a healer puts up those kind of numbers, everyone else in the raid is likely parsing that high too or higher. I'm sure a brawler in that raid is parsing 12K or higher for that trash mob. </blockquote>It's zone wide, average of 24 trash mobs.It's really impressive for a healer to deal 10k zw on 24 trash mobs no matter how good his/her gear, spec and buffs are in raid.On the contrary, when the dps gap between a healer and a supposed dps fighter, brawlers, is within 2k, it shows a big problem.

ShinGoku

04-28-2009, 10:26 AM

/sign for a show of frustration!I think the mechaics of the brawler classes is our downfall.Try the following: Fight the same mob 5 times and see how drastically your life bar differs by the end of each fight. I can honestly say that the RNG that seems to control avoidance is borked in my opinion, thats our real problem.Our avoidance seems to be the problem imo and I think our damage should be tuned up too.

Derang

04-28-2009, 12:40 PM

Well what ever, its just sad to see back in RoK I was always competiting the top 5 parsers around 7-10k, and now a Monk cant even compete with Bards...Because im having a hard time maintaining a 10k Zw on trash while bards are enjoying their 10-14k, rogues/chanters with their 15-19k and scouts/sorcerers with their 20k's+...I just dont get what happened to our class for us to gain like 1k-2k dps since RoK and every other class in the game jumped up double what they did in RoK...Does that not raise an eyebrow to devs? Maybe they did something wrong? Or they just dont want to admit it?And look at tanking, I just dont know what they are thinking because for me, RoK tanking seemed balanced for us compared to the just unbelievably stupid encounters of TSO...I seriously didnt think their job is hard...When are we going to see devs who act like a person and talk with the community not some robot who likes to write messages back that arnt even a straight answer and rather a "your all stupid, im right now get over it."

circusgirl

04-28-2009, 03:06 PM

At this point I'm honestly not expecting any fixes till the next expansion.

mr23sgte

04-28-2009, 04:06 PM

I doubt it ... I had that hope from the last expansion for TSO, but Brawlers were ignored.

Morrolan V

04-28-2009, 04:47 PM

<cite>Vinka@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>At this point I'm honestly not expecting any fixes till the next expansion.</blockquote>Aeralik basically said as much in a recent post. I'm glad I am our raid leader - if my main has to sit in favor of an alt, it's more palatable to make that call myself.

BChizzle

04-28-2009, 07:57 PM

Our DPS is fine. On Palace trash we can do 13-14k+ ZW if geared and buffed properly, when compared to a top end dpsing healer we are 30-40% more dps then them, when compared to a top end dpser on the same trash we are go figure 30-40% behind them.What we need is our Avatar weapon buffed a little for dps thats about it, even if they just even it up with the top end dmg of our instanced weapon.The biggest area of concern for monks is not dps it is tanking. We just fall way short of other tanks in the ability to hold agro and take a hit.

Siatfallen

04-29-2009, 01:06 AM

<cite>Aeralik wrote:</cite><blockquote>As I have mentioned a few times, we are first focusing on reducing some of the unnecessarily complex systems. Some of these changes will help make balancing an easier task going forward. Naturally, we want to get those done first. We also need to implement some new systems which are also needed for the long term health of the game and have been sitting on the backburner. From there, we will move onto some of the balance adjustments. There may be a few shorter term balance adjustments to damage but I wouldn't expect any major changes coming for some time. I have a lot on my task list for the year but right now they are still all in the conceptual state. Once we iron out the details of these tasks, we will make some posts similar to the researcher and spell renaming posts. Probably around fan faire, we will have more details about broader changes but for now expect smaller changes like the spell renaming and other refinements to existing systems.</blockquote>Link: <a href="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/posts/list.m?topic_id=449607 " target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/...sp; </a> - Bolded text by me.Translation: If we're going to fix anything now, it's not going to be by adjusting tanking ability, but by looking at damage output. I know that's not much of any help if you're hoping to be adjusted to be on par with plate fighters for survivability, though. But the brawler classes are very, very obvious candidates for these adjustments.

Morrolan V

04-29-2009, 04:18 AM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Our DPS is fine. On Palace trash we can do 13-14k+ ZW if geared and buffed properly, when compared to a top end dpsing healer we are 30-40% more dps then them, when compared to a top end dpser on the same trash we are go figure 30-40% behind them.What we need is our Avatar weapon buffed a little for dps thats about it, even if they just even it up with the top end dmg of our instanced weapon.The biggest area of concern for monks is not dps it is tanking. We just fall way short of other tanks in the ability to hold agro and take a hit.</blockquote>You think that being 30-40% behind the dps classes is "fine"?If you already had an MT and an OT, would you bring a brawler on a raid in place of ANY equally geared and skilled dps class right now? If so, why?Our snap aggro (when it works) and damage prevention abilities can close a 10% gap, not 30-40%.

Lethe5683

04-29-2009, 10:11 AM

<cite>ShinGoku wrote:</cite><blockquote>/sign for a show of frustration!I think the mechaics of the brawler classes is our downfall.Try the following: Fight the same mob 5 times and see how drastically your life bar differs by the end of each fight. I can honestly say that the RNG that seems to control avoidance is borked in my opinion, thats our real problem.Our avoidance seems to be the problem imo and I think our damage should be tuned up too.</blockquote>Yeah, fighting those mobs in lavastorm (the^ ones) If I start with full hp and don't use any special moves like knockout combination or chi then the amount of HP I have left at the end varies from like 100% to 60%.

Aull

04-29-2009, 11:52 AM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Our DPS is fine. On Palace trash we can do 13-14k+ ZW if geared and buffed properly, when compared to a top end dpsing healer we are 30-40% more dps then them, when compared to a top end dpser on the same trash we are go figure 30-40% behind them.What we need is our Avatar weapon buffed a little for dps thats about it, even if they just even it up with the top end dmg of our instanced weapon.The biggest area of concern for monks is not dps it is tanking. We just fall way short of other tanks in the ability to hold agro and take a hit.</blockquote> My issues are that while brawlers maybe 30-40% ahead of healers in dps there are plate tanks that are equaling and at times beating brawlers. All things being equal brawlers should be ahead of plate tanks since we lack their survivability. That has been stated many times and we all should know this. Also since brawlers lack the utility that the rogues have brawler dps (all things being equal) should be equal to the rogues as well.I think brawlers are where they need to be as far as survival, but the dps just is not there to compensate for that survival loss.Otherwise if all fighter dps remains as close as it is then brawlers need to have just as good of survival as plates do against any mob.

Couching

04-29-2009, 01:00 PM

Our dps is not fine. Our dps is 30%-40% behind T2 dps, and 60%-70% behind T1 dps. More important, our dps is not better than plate tanks and they have better survivability. We need better survivability and better dps.

Editedmind

04-29-2009, 01:22 PM

Gear will never fix a class problem. It might fix a symptom in the short term, but it wont fix the real problem, and it will probably get worse in the future with new gear and challenges that make the old stuff obsolete.I'm not saying that whatever items people want "fixed" shouldn't be adjusted in some manner. I'm just pointing out that that's one problem, and this is another. There is absolutely no reason why a monk shouldn't be able to hold their own while wearing level appropriate trash, I see plenty of other classes doing just that along the spectrum of tiers and playstyles.I get that monk is supposed to be a hybrid class, I just think the current implementation sucks. A monk is nowhere near as good in DPS as other DPS classes, nowhere near as good as tanking as other tanking classes, has average utility, unreliable survivability, lackluster group/raid buff, and only one heal with limited use. Basically, at the moment it feels like they're Norrath's hobo class.Mechanics that are fundemental to the monk class (like avoidance, stances, caps) keep getting changed and very little ever seems to be done to compensate for these changes. You don't fix that kind of stuff by tweaking a weapon, or giving us more trash and broken AA in the next expansion.

BChizzle

04-29-2009, 02:03 PM

<cite>Aull wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Our DPS is fine. On Palace trash we can do 13-14k+ ZW if geared and buffed properly, when compared to a top end dpsing healer we are 30-40% more dps then them, when compared to a top end dpser on the same trash we are go figure 30-40% behind them.What we need is our Avatar weapon buffed a little for dps thats about it, even if they just even it up with the top end dmg of our instanced weapon.The biggest area of concern for monks is not dps it is tanking. We just fall way short of other tanks in the ability to hold agro and take a hit.</blockquote> My issues are that while brawlers maybe 30-40% ahead of healers in dps there are plate tanks that are equaling and at times beating brawlers. All things being equal brawlers should be ahead of plate tanks since we lack their survivability. That has been stated many times and we all should know this. Also since brawlers lack the utility that the rogues have brawler dps (all things being equal) should be equal to the rogues as well.I think brawlers are where they need to be as far as survival, but the dps just is not there to compensate for that survival loss.Otherwise if all fighter dps remains as close as it is then brawlers need to have just as good of survival as plates do against any mob.</blockquote>This is the type of crap that created this broken situation in the first place. No we shouldn't have more dps because we have less survivability then a plate tank, if you wanted that you should have rolled a brigand or switch classes now plain and simple. The way to balance us it to increase our biggest weak spots which are our survivability and our ae agro. If they want to make us dps'er then they need to drop the whole tank thing, kill our survivability completely and just call us a DPS class otherwise we should be doing the same dps as other tanks. At that point we shouldn't be able to tank high heroic content so our dps is justified.

BChizzle

04-29-2009, 02:06 PM

Aull

04-29-2009, 02:27 PM

We can all think what we wish. Honestly brigands and swashies can take a hit just as good as any brawler can, have utility, tank instances, and keep that awesome dps they have. So what is the problem with monks and bruisers having similar dps as a rogue yet not have the utility?Either better survival and be able to compete with plate tanks or better dps.

BChizzle

04-29-2009, 02:44 PM

<cite>Aull wrote:</cite><blockquote>We can all think what we wish. Honestly brigands and swashies can take a hit just as good as any brawler can, have utility, tank instances, and keep that awesome dps they have. So what is the problem with monks and bruisers having similar dps as a rogue yet not have the utility?Either better survival and be able to compete with plate tanks or better dps.</blockquote>Brigs and swashies aren't rolling with 90%+ avoidance.

Couching

04-29-2009, 03:38 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Your dps is not better then your plate tanks. For some reason you hit stuff at 40% or w/e. I pretty much always equal beat my plate tanks with less buffs.</blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>EDIT: DPS wise, brawlers and plates are very close, however, I think what every forgets is that guards and zerks are still using the offhand from VP when dpsing, as soon as they get that upgraded they pass us by a mile.</blockquote>You slapped your face. Not to say, you have also said you got owned by your guild guardian in palace trash.

NamaeZero

04-29-2009, 03:42 PM

Brawlers and the Monk in particular (the defensive brawler) do suffer from a hybrid identity crisis. Despite being in the Fighter archetype the way they've made our primary defense (Avoidance) work means it's simply not as good, reliable, or as universal applicable as Mitigation has become. There are many, many monsters in EQ2 that have attacks that can't be avoided, but the list of attacks that can't be mitigated is vanishingly small, for example. This was something that was not true at one time and Avoidance was briefly king, but complaints about the Brawlers being nearly invulnerable led to Avoidance being nerfed and bizarre/isoteric things like 'Critical Avoidance' 'Shield Effectiveness' and 'Critical Mitigation' being introduced.Because Monks cannot fill tank roles as well as Mitigation tanks it led to the school of thought that we should be DPS, since we are/were one of the highest damaging subclass of Fighters. I don't believe this was ever intended, but I personally think it is an angle SOE should consider pursuing at this point. The Mitigation tank classes have carved out their respective niches fairly solidly, and placing Monks back into their intended role as tanks will make for an ackward transition for the game as the Mitigation tanks struggle to keep with their role. If we are not made into tanks, then our DPS needs to be moved in the direction of DPS classes, and should take into account that monks are a melee range-only class and therefore take greater risks for our damage (we have to be in AoE range almost always, for example.)Ideally, I'd like to see more use made of Stances. Please kill the skill reduction penalties for offense/defense skills. They cloud the issue immensely. Use something that makes more sense, like -50% damage to all attacks and +250% threat for Defensive Stance, and +100% damage and -50% threat for Offensive. You don't have to use those numbers, but a format that doesn't require the Persona menu to decode the advantage would be great.Remove the complicated stacking/cap rules for haste, haste either stacks or it doesn't; this means you will be able to give out items with a large amount of unstacking haste, and lots of items with small amounts of additional haste. Haste and flat across the board increases to damage should be the only ways to directly increase damage ouside of a new better weapon. No more guessing with +35 combat art damage, or +1 to DPS, or +3 Piercing.Look at fixing the Monks invisibility buff. When EQ2 opened, each form of invisibility had it's own disadvantage; Scout invis generally slowed you down, Mage invisibility had a nasty habit of dropping at random with only a little warning, and Monk Invisibility drained your power bar, so it could be maintained for a minute at most. Later, Mages complained about their invisibility dropping as a QoL issue and it was made more reliable, however that caused the scouts to be unhappy so all Invisibility was given the scout movement speed disadvantage. Somewhere in the process it was forgotten that the Monk's invisibility retained it's Power loss disadvantage, making it the worst form of invisibility with a double penalty. Either remove the run speed penalty (It makes no sense for an ability called 'Wind Walk' to make you slower) or the power drain.Fix Monk AA lines! It's absolutely inexcusable that Monk Class AA's feature only 3 endline abilities and every other class has 4 or more. Perhaps it wouldn't be so awful if any one of those abilities was worth even half the AA's you invest in them. Combination is difficult to use and provides only a very small advantage in DPS. Evade Check is literally broken, and Superior Riptose is good though very weak for an endline AA ability. TSO and Brawler AA's are only slightly less maddingly bad, and other people have already written better posts on the subject of them.

BChizzle

04-29-2009, 03:44 PM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Your dps is not better then your plate tanks. For some reason you hit stuff at 40% or w/e. I pretty much always equal beat my plate tanks with less buffs.</blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>EDIT: DPS wise, brawlers and plates are very close, however, I think what every forgets is that guards and zerks are still using the offhand from VP when dpsing, as soon as they get that upgraded they pass us by a mile.</blockquote>You slapped your face. Not to say, you have also said you got owned by your guild guardian in palace trash.</blockquote>Wrong since I have said repeatedly our off hand needs an upgrade. That has nothing to do with class balance and is itemization.

Couching

04-29-2009, 03:52 PM

It's plain and simple that you won't deal dps without gear. Itemization should and have to be part of class balance.Besides, plate tanks can deal similar dps with last xpac weapon as brawlers with tso weapon. It implied that plate tanks have better dps potential because they can deal similar dps with worse weapon.

BChizzle

04-29-2009, 04:17 PM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>It's plain and simple that you won't deal dps without gear. Itemization should and have to be part of class balance.Besides, plate tanks can deal similar dps with last xpac weapon as brawlers with tso weapon. It implied that plate tanks have better dps potential because they can deal similar dps with worse weapon.</blockquote>Wrong because you are arguing that Plate tanks might get an upgrade on their off hand then failing to take into account we also might get an upgrade. As far as last expansions dps we can still use nightmare wraps and parse similar to plate tanks as well.

Couching

04-29-2009, 04:20 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>It's plain and simple that you won't deal dps without gear. Itemization should and have to be part of class balance.Besides, plate tanks can deal similar dps with last xpac weapon as brawlers with tso weapon. It implied that plate tanks have better dps potential because they can deal similar dps with worse weapon.</blockquote>Wrong because you are arguing that Plate tanks might get an upgrade on their off hand then failing to take into account we also might get an upgrade. As far as last expansions dps we can still use nightmare wraps and parse similar to plate tanks as well.</blockquote>Of course we can in last xpac because we had better auto attack modifier than plate tanks.In this xpac, all fighters have same auto attack modifier. That's why plate tanks can deal similar dps as brawlers with worse weapon. It implied that plate tanks have better dps potential.

BChizzle

04-29-2009, 04:26 PM

Put it this way what Couching is trying (but failing) to do is twist my argument that tank dps is equal so survivablility should be equal to suit his needs. All things considered tank dps is in a good place, we fall just in behind some of the support classes and ahead of some of them as well. We are also pretty balanced dps wise with the exception of ae fights. The glaring difficulty staring you guys in the face is the imbalance when it comes to tanking, agro generation and the ability to take a hit are 2nd class for monks. The argument that since we can't take a hit so we should be able to dps more just widens this imbalance plain and simple, that is the wrong direction.

BChizzle

04-29-2009, 04:28 PM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite></cite>Of course we can in last xpac because we had better auto attack modifier than plate tanks.In this xpac, all fighters have same auto attack modifier. That's why plate tanks can deal similar dps as brawlers with worse weapon. It implied that plate tanks have better dps potential.</blockquote>Why shouldn't all tanks have the same auto attack modifier? They are all TANKS. Their job is to TANK,

Couching

04-29-2009, 04:34 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Put it this way what Couching is trying (but failing) to do is twist my argument that tank dps is equal so survivablility should be equal to suit his needs. All things considered tank dps is in a good place, we fall just in behind some of the support classes and ahead of some of them as well. We are also pretty balanced dps wise with the exception of ae fights. The glaring difficulty staring you guys in the face is the imbalance when it comes to tanking, agro generation and the ability to take a hit are 2nd class for monks. The argument that since we can't take a hit so we should be able to dps more just widens this imbalance plain and simple, that is the wrong direction.</blockquote>Wrong.Aside of survivability, we have less dps potential than plate tanks in raid. OP already stated that even with legendary gear, our CA can be capped because most of them are tiny damage with fast reuse timer.

BChizzle

04-29-2009, 04:53 PM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Wrong.Aside of survivability, we have less dps potential than plate tanks in raid. OP already stated that even with legendary gear, our CA can be capped because most of them are tiny damage with fast reuse timer.</blockquote>+CA is just one way to increase 'dps potential', and no our CA's can't be capped that way only SOME of them can. It is completely and utterly useless to exaggerate things to the extent you do to create an argument that is proven invalid by the exaggeration in the first place. Ever look at a top zerker parse to see how much their CA's do? How about a guardian? If you took the time you would see that their CA's do pretty much the same as ours over time. Crusader CA's are also not that special however they have their spells as well so that makes it a tougher comparison as they depend less on auto attack then any of us other tanks.Fact is in Palace yesterday for the whole zone not just trash I was almost 9k with my top CA doing 275 dps, neither my zerker nor my guard have CA's that make up that much of their parses.

Couching

04-29-2009, 05:22 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Wrong.Aside of survivability, we have less dps potential than plate tanks in raid. OP already stated that even with legendary gear, our CA can be capped because most of them are tiny damage with fast reuse timer.</blockquote>+CA is just one way to increase 'dps potential', and no our CA's can't be capped that way only SOME of them can. It is completely and utterly useless to exaggerate things to the extent you do to create an argument that is proven invalid by the exaggeration in the first place. Ever look at a top zerker parse to see how much their CA's do? How about a guardian? If you took the time you would see that their CA's do pretty much the same as ours over time. Crusader CA's are also not that special however they have their spells as well so that makes it a tougher comparison as they depend less on auto attack then any of us other tanks.Fact is in Palace yesterday for the whole zone not just trash I was almost 9k with my top CA doing 275 dps, neither my zerker nor my guard have CA's that make up that much of their parses.</blockquote>If you check zerker or guardian CAs, most of their CAs have higher damage but with longer reuse timer.As what you have said, SOME of our CAs can be capped. The fact is their CAs have more potential for + CA and we didn't. It's nonsense to compare dps between plate tanks when they were tanking hard named with tank gear and you were not. Not to say, one CA damage means nothing. Our highest CA may deal more than their highest CA over time, but also, some of our CAs deal less than their other CAs.Last, I am pretty sure your plate tanks didn't have enough dps gear as you have. You have more + base damage gear than them. Your parse just proved one thing; gear is important for class performance.

BChizzle

04-29-2009, 05:47 PM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>If you check zerker or guardian CAs, most of their CAs have higher damage but with longer reuse timer.As what you have said, SOME of our CAs can be capped. The fact is their CAs have more potential for + CA and we didn't. It's nonsense to compare dps between plate tanks when they were tanking hard named with tank gear and you were not. Not to say, one CA damage means nothing. Our highest CA may deal more than their highest CA over time, but also, some of our CAs deal less than their other CAs.Last, I am pretty sure your plate tanks didn't have enough dps gear as you have. You have more + base damage gear than them. Your parse just proved one thing; gear is important for class performance.</blockquote>Sorry to break it to you but our tanks tank palace in their DPS gear there is nothing hard about that zone whatsoever.

Couching

04-29-2009, 06:00 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>If you check zerker or guardian CAs, most of their CAs have higher damage but with longer reuse timer.As what you have said, SOME of our CAs can be capped. The fact is their CAs have more potential for + CA and we didn't. It's nonsense to compare dps between plate tanks when they were tanking hard named with tank gear and you were not. Not to say, one CA damage means nothing. Our highest CA may deal more than their highest CA over time, but also, some of our CAs deal less than their other CAs.Last, I am pretty sure your plate tanks didn't have enough dps gear as you have. You have more + base damage gear than them. Your parse just proved one thing; gear is important for class performance.</blockquote>Sorry to break it to you but our tanks tank palace in their DPS gear there is nothing hard about that zone whatsoever.</blockquote>And it didn't change the fact that they have less avatar dps gear than you have. The fact is you said you did less dps than your guardian before you got avatar dps gear.

BChizzle

04-29-2009, 06:12 PM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>And it didn't change the fact that they have less avatar dps gear than you have. The fact is you said you did less dps than your guardian before you got avatar dps gear.</blockquote>Huh? Since when do plate tanks have less avatar gear then leather?

Couching

04-29-2009, 06:16 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>And it didn't change the fact that they have less avatar dps gear than you have. The fact is you said you did less dps than your guardian before you got avatar dps gear.</blockquote>Huh? Since when do plate tanks have less avatar gear then leather?</blockquote>/clapnice reading skill. /shrug

BChizzle

04-29-2009, 06:21 PM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>And it didn't change the fact that they have less avatar dps gear than you have. The fact is you said you did less dps than your guardian before you got avatar dps gear.</blockquote>Huh? Since when do plate tanks have less avatar gear then leather?</blockquote>/clapnice reading skill. /shrug</blockquote>Now you are just making stuff up. It is pretty pathetic. I wear 4 avatar items, 2 charms 2 items, it isn't even remotely close to the amount my plates wear.EDIT: Sorry 5 items.

Couching

04-29-2009, 06:40 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>And it didn't change the fact that they have less avatar dps gear than you have. The fact is you said you did less dps than your guardian before you got avatar dps gear.</blockquote>Huh? Since when do plate tanks have less avatar gear then leather?</blockquote>/clapnice reading skill. /shrug</blockquote>Now you are just making stuff up. It is pretty pathetic. I wear 4 avatar items, 2 charms 2 items, it isn't even remotely close to the amount my plates wear.EDIT: Sorry 5 items.</blockquote>You have war bp. It is better than your guardian's bp, valor bp, for dps, a lot better.You have ring of tormenting. It's a lot better dps ring than the rings your guaridan has.You also have much better dps wrist, bracelet of the trickster.The only thing that your guardian has better for dps is charm. He has two evil charms and you have two neutral charms and two good charms.Now, who is making stuff up? It's pretty pathetic.

BChizzle

04-29-2009, 07:11 PM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>You have war bp. It is better than your guardian's bp, valor bp, for dps, a lot better.You have ring of tormenting. It's a lot better dps ring than the rings your guaridan has.You also have much better dps wrist, bracelet of the trickster.The only thing that your guardian has better for dps is charm. He has two evil charms and you have two neutral charms and two good charms.Now, who is making stuff up? It's pretty pathetic.</blockquote>You are obviously making things up since I don't have 2 neutral charms. My wrists aren't avatar wrists and he has those two but he uses the immune stuff since those are you know the most OP dps items in the game. Like I said you will lie and reach and exaggerate just to prove a point.The fact is you hit Gynok for 40% I hit him for 95%. Of course you would complain about our dps because obviously you haven't learned how to effectively dps yet.

Couching

04-29-2009, 07:26 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>You have war bp. It is better than your guardian's bp, valor bp, for dps, a lot better.You have ring of tormenting. It's a lot better dps ring than the rings your guaridan has.You also have much better dps wrist, bracelet of the trickster.The only thing that your guardian has better for dps is charm. He has two evil charms and you have two neutral charms and two good charms.Now, who is making stuff up? It's pretty pathetic.</blockquote>You are obviously making things up since I don't have 2 neutral charms. My wrists aren't avatar wrists and he has those two but he uses the immune stuff since those are you know the most OP dps items in the game. Like I said you will lie and reach and exaggerate just to prove a point.The fact is you hit Gynok for 40% I hit him for 95%. Of course you would complain about our dps because obviously you haven't learned how to effectively dps yet.</blockquote>/shrugYou can lie that you don't have it just because you are on tank gear in eq2players at the moment. You better never use itThe fact is you said you got pwnt hard by your guardian in dps. Now, you have better dps gear and finally you can parse than your guardian. GRATS ! <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/ed515dbff23a0ee3241dcc0a601c9ed6.gif" border="0" />For hit rate, even noob knows that stance, gear, group buff (accuracy buff) determine the hit rate, not players.Hi, but I am not suprised that you don't know. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/97ada74b88049a6d50a6ed40898a03d7.gif" border="0" />

BChizzle

04-29-2009, 07:33 PM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>/shrugYou can lie that you don't have it just because you are on tank gear in eq2players at the moment. You better never use itThe fact is you said you got pwnt hard by your guardian in dps. Now, you have better dps gear and finally you can parse than your guardian. GRATS ! <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/ed515dbff23a0ee3241dcc0a601c9ed6.gif" border="0" />For hit rate, even noob knows that stance, gear, group buff (accuracy buff) determine the hit rate, not players.Hi, but I am not suprised that you don't know. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/97ada74b88049a6d50a6ed40898a03d7.gif" border="0" /></blockquote>I am not the one hitting Gynok for 40%.

Couching

04-29-2009, 07:44 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>/shrugYou can lie that you don't have it just because you are on tank gear in eq2players at the moment. Yoetter never use itThe fact is you said you got pwnt hard by your guardian in dps. Now, you have better dps gear and finally you can parse than your guardian. GRATS ! <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/ed515dbff23a0ee3241dcc0a601c9ed6.gif" border="0" />For hit rate, even noob knows that stance, gear, group buff (accuracy buff) determine the hit rate, not players.Hi, but I am not suprised that you don't know. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/97ada74b88049a6d50a6ed40898a03d7.gif" border="0" /></blockquote>I am not the one hitting Gynok for 40% and finally beated guardian in dps.</blockquote>/clap for you. woot !

BChizzle

04-29-2009, 07:52 PM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>/shrugYou can lie that you don't have it just because you are on tank gear in eq2players at the moment. Yoetter never use itThe fact is you said you got pwnt hard by your guardian in dps. Now, you have better dps gear and finally you can parse than your guardian. GRATS ! <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/ed515dbff23a0ee3241dcc0a601c9ed6.gif" border="0" />For hit rate, even noob knows that stance, gear, group buff (accuracy buff) determine the hit rate, not players.Hi, but I am not suprised that you don't know. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/97ada74b88049a6d50a6ed40898a03d7.gif" border="0" /></blockquote>I am not the one hitting Gynok for 40% and finally beated guardian in dps.</blockquote>/clap for you. woot !</blockquote>Seeing how guards are dropping 14k on palace trash I am pretty certain you aren't beating guardian dps. But keep trying maybe.

Couching

04-29-2009, 07:55 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Seeing how guards are dropping 14k on palace trash I am pretty certain you aren't beating guardian dps. But keep trying maybe.</blockquote>Good, finally, you admitted that our dps is not better than plate tanks.Then why did you debate with me when I said our dps is not better than plate tanks?

Aull

04-29-2009, 08:27 PM

BChiz what advantage do monks have over the plate tanks?

Derang

04-29-2009, 08:35 PM

<cite>Aull wrote:</cite><blockquote>BChiz what advantage do monks have over the plate tanks?</blockquote>I'd like to know as well BChizzle, since you seem to be "All Knowing"

BChizzle

04-29-2009, 08:51 PM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Seeing how guards are dropping 14k on palace trash I am pretty certain you aren't beating guardian dps. But keep trying maybe.</blockquote>Good, finally, you admitted that our dps is not better than plate tanks.Then why did you debate with me when I said our dps is not better than plate tanks?</blockquote>Nope I said your dps since you hit mobs for 40%

BChizzle

04-29-2009, 08:53 PM

<cite>Aull wrote:</cite><blockquote>BChiz what advantage do monks have over the plate tanks?</blockquote>Easy we can farm shineys better and have a better RW buff.

Couching

04-29-2009, 09:01 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Seeing how guards are dropping 14k on palace trash I am pretty certain you aren't beating guardian dps. But keep trying maybe.</blockquote>Good, finally, you admitted that our dps is not better than plate tanks.Then why did you debate with me when I said our dps is not better than plate tanks?</blockquote>Nope I said your dps since you hit mobs for 40%</blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Aull wrote:</cite><blockquote>BChiz what advantage do monks have over the plate tanks?</blockquote>Easy we can farm shineys better and have a better RW buff.</blockquote>You slapped your face again and again.

BChizzle

04-29-2009, 09:47 PM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>You slapped your face again and again.</blockquote>We must have a language barrier or something here. We obviously have a math one since you hit mobs for 40% hit rate.

Aull

04-29-2009, 10:15 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Aull wrote:</cite><blockquote>BChiz what advantage do monks have over the plate tanks?</blockquote>Easy we can farm shineys better and have a better RW buff.</blockquote>LOL. That is funny but really is there anything else that can be pointed out?

Lethe5683

04-29-2009, 10:20 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Aull wrote:</cite><blockquote>We can all think what we wish. Honestly brigands and swashies can take a hit just as good as any brawler can, have utility, tank instances, and keep that awesome dps they have. So what is the problem with monks and bruisers having similar dps as a rogue yet not have the utility?Either better survival and be able to compete with plate tanks or better dps.</blockquote>Brigs and swashies aren't rolling with 90%+ avoidance.</blockquote>And neither are brawlers, obviously. In offensive we have around 60-70 % (approximatly) depending on gear and AAs. Not to mention that all of that avoidance is uncontested AKA nearly useless in a raid.<cite>Aull wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Aull wrote:</cite><blockquote>BChiz what advantage do monks have over the plate tanks?</blockquote>Easy we can farm shineys better and have a better RW buff.</blockquote>LOL. That is funny but really is there anything else that can be pointed out?</blockquote>That BChizzle is actually a guardian posting under a false forum name or else a exceptionally stupid brawler.

BChizzle

04-29-2009, 11:06 PM

<cite>Aull wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Aull wrote:</cite><blockquote>BChiz what advantage do monks have over the plate tanks?</blockquote>Easy we can farm shineys better and have a better RW buff.</blockquote>LOL. That is funny but really is there anything else that can be pointed out?</blockquote>Someone being the 'best' is what really unbalances stuff. That is the whole point, we should be near in everything. I can understand being a little better in one thing, but that difference should be minute not massive. Increase our survivability and ae agro that will help balance us, pumping our DPS just puts things more out of whack.

BChizzle

04-29-2009, 11:11 PM

<cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote>That BChizzle is actually a guardian posting under a false forum name or else a exceptionally stupid brawler.</blockquote>Don't make it personal, I am 20 times the brawler you would ever hope to be. Fact is there is a portion of the monk community that want to be DPS'ers, that is horrible of an idea we are tanks not dps they need to fix our tanking ability. If you want to dps and be a weak tank roll a brig.

Lethe5683

04-29-2009, 11:17 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote>That BChizzle is actually a guardian posting under a false forum name or else a exceptionally stupid brawler.</blockquote>Don't make it personal, I am 20 times the brawler you would ever hope to be. Fact is there is a portion of the monk community that want to be DPS'ers, that is horrible of an idea we are tanks not dps they need to fix our tanking ability. If you want to dps and be a weak tank roll a brig.</blockquote>If your posts here are anything to judge by you are not a good brawler and are doing nothing but spreading false information on the forums making it more difficult for the devs. And when did I ever say that I wanted to DPS?

Derang

04-29-2009, 11:30 PM

I know a lot of us love to tank, but lets face it, theirs 4 groups in a raid and no raid should be running more than 3 fighters...Out of those 3 fighters a Guard/Zerker/SK are #1 choices if you know what your doing this expansion. I dont care if your skill is amazing a Brawler will never tank better than a Plate tank. So what is the true point of our class when their is no need for us to tank, and now a lot of Brawlers are mad because we could fall back on our dps to keep a spot in a raid since we cant equally tank as plates. But! We can even dps compared to other plate tanks dpsing, because honestly BChizzle your not gonna out dps a SK/Zerker/Dual wielding Guard unless they suck and dont know what they are doing. So what do brawlers have to keep us in raids now, we arnt even unique anymore! Raidwide that most classes are needing less and less every expansion...Our class should have come from EQ1 the same role here...The whole idea of 6 tanks is the stupidest design ever, and thanks to that a lot of us suffer...no point in fighting over who's a better Monk cause its getting annoying.

BChizzle

04-30-2009, 12:22 AM

<cite>Deranged wrote:</cite><blockquote>I know a lot of us love to tank, but lets face it, theirs 4 groups in a raid and no raid should be running more than 3 fighters...Out of those 3 fighters a Guard/Zerker/SK are #1 choices if you know what your doing this expansion. I dont care if your skill is amazing a Brawler will never tank better than a Plate tank. So what is the true point of our class when their is no need for us to tank, and now a lot of Brawlers are mad because we could fall back on our dps to keep a spot in a raid since we cant equally tank as plates. But! We can even dps compared to other plate tanks dpsing, because honestly BChizzle your not gonna out dps a SK/Zerker/Dual wielding Guard unless they suck and dont know what they are doing. So what do brawlers have to keep us in raids now, we arnt even unique anymore! Raidwide that most classes are needing less and less every expansion...Our class should have come from EQ1 the same role here...The whole idea of 6 tanks is the stupidest design ever, and thanks to that a lot of us suffer...no point in fighting over who's a better Monk cause its getting annoying.</blockquote>You rproblem is quite clear yet you fail to see the solution correctly. You say that the reason why you can't be one of the tanks in a raid is because a zerk/guard/sk tank better, yet ask for dps instead of wanting a fix so a zerk/guard/sk aren't considered the better tank. Like I said if you want to dps roll a brig you don't need devs to change around the whole role of a class for you, one already exists for what you are asking for.Look if I am selling orange juice but I am short oranges to squeeze into my next pitcher I don't ask for apples.

BChizzle

04-30-2009, 12:28 AM

<cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote>That BChizzle is actually a guardian posting under a false forum name or else a exceptionally stupid brawler.</blockquote>Don't make it personal, I am 20 times the brawler you would ever hope to be. Fact is there is a portion of the monk community that want to be DPS'ers, that is horrible of an idea we are tanks not dps they need to fix our tanking ability. If you want to dps and be a weak tank roll a brig.</blockquote>If your posts here are anything to judge by you are not a good brawler and are doing nothing but spreading false information on the forums making it more difficult for the devs. And when did I ever say that I wanted to DPS?</blockquote>Why don't you just move along already, you are obviously bringing nothing to the table but snappy comments without any content. The fact is I am pretty much the best monk in this game hands down, I obviously know the class better then most and have watched for years while people use hyperbole on our issues acting like the sky is falling asking for the world when all we ever need are just some simple tweaks.Fix our tanking and you fix the monk problem plain and simple, give us dps and you create an even further imbalance.

Morrolan V

04-30-2009, 12:55 AM

First off guys, this ain't that other site.Chizzle, what we have is a difference of vision, not a different view of the facts. Your vision is to keep brawler dps equal with other fighters and bring our survivability and threat up to par. (You agree, I take it, that they are currently not where they should be.)Many of us see it the other way around. We think there are enough tanks in the game, and we should have our DPS and utility brought up so that we once again have a viable place in raids in those roles.What you fail to acknowledge is that, for the ENTIRE course of EQ2, brawlers have been the "dps fighters." With the exception of zerkers and AoE dps, we have always, until now, had a meaningful dps advantage over every other fighter. Many of us rolled our characters, itemized them, played them, and grew used to them in THAT role.Now, we have equal dps with every other fighter and worse survivability and aoe aggro.I don't want to be just another tank (even though I like to tank). I want to be a brawler - I want to hit harder than other tanks and am willing to let them maintain the survivability edge. I think that's more interesting, more consistent with four and a half years of game history, and a better model for raid construction.

Derang

04-30-2009, 01:02 AM

<cite>Rythalian@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>First off guys, this ain't that other site.Chizzle, what we have is a difference of vision, not a different view of the facts. Your vision is to keep brawler dps equal with other fighters and bring our survivability and threat up to par. (You agree, I take it, that they are currently not where they should be.)Many of us see it the other way around. We think there are enough tanks in the game, and we should have our DPS and utility brought up so that we once again have a viable place in raids in those roles.What you fail to acknowledge is that, for the ENTIRE course of EQ2, brawlers have been the "dps fighters." With the exception of zerkers and AoE dps, we have always, until now, had a meaningful dps advantage over every other fighter. Many of us rolled our characters, itemized them, played them, and grew used to them in THAT role.Now, we have equal dps with every other fighter and worse survivability and aoe aggro.I don't want to be just another tank (even though I like to tank). I want to be a brawler - I want to hit harder than other tanks and am willing to let them maintain the survivability edge. I think that's more interesting, more consistent with four and a half years of game history, and a better model for raid construction.</blockquote>Exactly what i'm trying to say, but unfortunately BChizzle cant comprehend this cause "He is the best Monk hands down"! With gear maybe? I hate a class that rely's all on gear, when other classes got huge advantages with aa's and true item progression. For Brawlers we need our Avatar pieces to be the "Best" which is stupid, way to make yourself look cool! /sarcasm off!

Couching

04-30-2009, 01:30 AM

<cite>Deranged wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rythalian@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>First off guys, this ain't that other site.Chizzle, what we have is a difference of vision, not a different view of the facts. Your vision is to keep brawler dps equal with other fighters and bring our survivability and threat up to par. (You agree, I take it, that they are currently not where they should be.)Many of us see it the other way around. We think there are enough tanks in the game, and we should have our DPS and utility brought up so that we once again have a viable place in raids in those roles.What you fail to acknowledge is that, for the ENTIRE course of EQ2, brawlers have been the "dps fighters." With the exception of zerkers and AoE dps, we have always, until now, had a meaningful dps advantage over every other fighter. Many of us rolled our characters, itemized them, played them, and grew used to them in THAT role.Now, we have equal dps with every other fighter and worse survivability and aoe aggro.I don't want to be just another tank (even though I like to tank). I want to be a brawler - I want to hit harder than other tanks and am willing to let them maintain the survivability edge. I think that's more interesting, more consistent with four and a half years of game history, and a better model for raid construction.</blockquote>Exactly what i'm trying to say, but unfortunately BChizzle cant comprehend this cause "He is the best Monk hands down"! With gear maybe? I hate a class that rely's all on gear, when other classes got huge advantages with aa's and true item progression. For Brawlers we need our Avatar pieces to be the "Best" which is stupid, way to make yourself look cool! /sarcasm off!</blockquote>Very well said.

BChizzle

04-30-2009, 02:03 AM

This is the stuff that really is untrue. When this game was launched we were great tanks, then we all of a sudden were nerfed, for pretty much two expansions any time we were tanking in a raid situation we would pretty much get 1 shotted. EoF fixed that, we became even better tanks in RoK, the progression has been pretty straight forward of us getting better at tanking to balance things out. You guys rolled a fighter class, fighter = tank in this game plain and simple, quit asking to be scouts.And the whole DPS tank concept completely imbalances this game, if we are doing signifantly more dps then all the other tanks then why ever bring any of the other tanks? Fact is if monks are going to be in raids it will have to be for more then just bringing dps because for that why not just bring a scout? As long as 'monks in raids based upon dps' is around we will always be the red headed stepchild of tanking.I'll say it again, OUR DPS IS PRETTY MUCH FINE WHERE IT IS, it is other areas where we need to improve.

BChizzle

04-30-2009, 02:08 AM

<cite>Deranged wrote:</cite><blockquote>Exactly what i'm trying to say, but unfortunately BChizzle cant comprehend this cause "He is the best Monk hands down"! With gear maybe? I hate a class that rely's all on gear, when other classes got huge advantages with aa's and true item progression. For Brawlers we need our Avatar pieces to be the "Best" which is stupid, way to make yourself look cool! /sarcasm off!</blockquote>Yeah because I just logged on and my gear was what it is, I didn't work to get where I am. Plus your statement applies to any class, sorry to say but pushing buttons abilities all being equal having the best gear does make for the better player, thats what this game is built around, that is why you even group to get better gear. Get better stuff and improve.

Siatfallen

04-30-2009, 02:09 AM

So uh... When the dust settles and we're done flinging mud, and assuming the thread has not by then been logged, a few basic questions:1: It's been stated that there're not enough fighter slots in a raid to ever justify more than 4 tanks. Does anyone contest that this is true?2: Light tanking with DPS and some buffs as the vision for brawlers is breaking the class why?I can understand wanting to see the class go elsewhere, but what is the mechanical argument for this solution not becoming a viable member in a raid, on top of two other tanks?Perhaps I'm just daft, or I represent the other side of the argument, but aside from the "devs will never pull this off right/don't care enough/will probably mess it up" arguments, which I can follow because that's exactly what they did with the horrible design they implemented for brawlers with tSO launch... I'm not hearing a whole lot here?

BChizzle

04-30-2009, 02:10 AM

<cite>Rythalian@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>We think there are enough tanks in the game, and we should have our DPS and utility brought up so that we once again have a viable place in raids in those roles.</blockquote>There are enough scouts in this game already. Plain and simple you are talking about a scout role.

BChizzle

04-30-2009, 02:17 AM

<cite>Siatfallen wrote:</cite><blockquote>So uh... When the dust settles and we're done flinging mud, and assuming the thread has not by then been logged, a few basic questions:1: It's been stated that there're not enough fighter slots in a raid to ever justify more than 4 tanks. Does anyone contest that this is true?2: Light tanking with DPS and some buffs as the vision for brawlers is breaking the class why?I can understand wanting to see the class go elsewhere, but what is the mechanical argument for this solution not becoming a viable member in a raid, on top of two other tanks?Perhaps I'm just daft, or I represent the other side of the argument, but aside from the "devs will never pull this off right/don't care enough/will probably mess it up" arguments, which I can follow because that's exactly what they did with the horrible design they implemented for brawlers with tSO launch... I'm not hearing a whole lot here?</blockquote>There is no reason why you can't have 1 of each subclass in a raid. Fact of the matter is people would rather have a guard, zerk, paly, sk in a raid over a monk because they can tank better, nobody is saying hey lets choose a guard or a paly over a monk because they dps better.Once again with this light tanking stuff as well what you are describing is a scout. Reroll

Couching

04-30-2009, 02:27 AM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Siatfallen wrote:</cite><blockquote>So uh... When the dust settles and we're done flinging mud, and assuming the thread has not by then been logged, a few basic questions:1: It's been stated that there're not enough fighter slots in a raid to ever justify more than 4 tanks. Does anyone contest that this is true?2: Light tanking with DPS and some buffs as the vision for brawlers is breaking the class why?I can understand wanting to see the class go elsewhere, but what is the mechanical argument for this solution not becoming a viable member in a raid, on top of two other tanks?Perhaps I'm just daft, or I represent the other side of the argument, but aside from the "devs will never pull this off right/don't care enough/will probably mess it up" arguments, which I can follow because that's exactly what they did with the horrible design they implemented for brawlers with tSO launch... I'm not hearing a whole lot here?</blockquote>There is no reason why you can't have 1 of each subclass in a raid. Fact of the matter is people would rather have a guard, zerk, paly, sk in a raid over a monk because they can tank better, nobody is saying hey lets choose a guard or a paly over a monk because they dps better.Once again with this light tanking stuff as well what you are describing is a scout. Reroll</blockquote>You contradicted what you have said again and again; you have said it only needs two tanks in raid.Even if monk had same survivability as other plate tanks, there is still no need to bring monk in with our current dps.You said guardian still has best survivability and guardian will be MT for sure. Sk/zerker/pal will still be better OT for aoe dps/aggro.Even if monk had same aoe/dps as sk/zerker/pal, the best result is that monk has to compete with sk/zker/pal for OT. Very poor result.

Couching

04-30-2009, 02:29 AM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Deranged wrote:</cite><blockquote>Exactly what i'm trying to say, but unfortunately BChizzle cant comprehend this cause "He is the best Monk hands down"! With gear maybe? I hate a class that rely's all on gear, when other classes got huge advantages with aa's and true item progression. For Brawlers we need our Avatar pieces to be the "Best" which is stupid, way to make yourself look cool! /sarcasm off!</blockquote>Yeah because I just logged on and my gear was what it is, I didn't work to get where I am. Plus your statement applies to any class, sorry to say but pushing buttons abilities all being equal having the best gear does make for the better player, thats what this game is built around, that is why you even group to get better gear. Get better stuff and improve.</blockquote>Then you are not best monk since your tanking gear sucks. Come back when you have better gear for tanking. Monk is tank, not dpser.

BChizzle

04-30-2009, 02:40 AM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Then you are not best monk since your tanking gear sucks. Come back when you have better gear for tanking. Monk is tank, not dpser.</blockquote>Since I produce enough agro to hold a mob off a raid that does probably 100k more dps then your raid I think it is safe to say I do my tanking role great.

Morrolan V

04-30-2009, 02:42 AM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Siatfallen wrote:</cite><blockquote>So uh... When the dust settles and we're done flinging mud, and assuming the thread has not by then been logged, a few basic questions:1: It's been stated that there're not enough fighter slots in a raid to ever justify more than 4 tanks. Does anyone contest that this is true?2: Light tanking with DPS and some buffs as the vision for brawlers is breaking the class why?I can understand wanting to see the class go elsewhere, but what is the mechanical argument for this solution not becoming a viable member in a raid, on top of two other tanks?Perhaps I'm just daft, or I represent the other side of the argument, but aside from the "devs will never pull this off right/don't care enough/will probably mess it up" arguments, which I can follow because that's exactly what they did with the horrible design they implemented for brawlers with tSO launch... I'm not hearing a whole lot here?</blockquote>There is no reason why you can't have 1 of each subclass in a raid. Fact of the matter is people would rather have a guard, zerk, paly, sk in a raid over a monk because they can tank better, nobody is saying hey lets choose a guard or a paly over a monk because they dps better.Once again with this light tanking stuff as well what you are describing is a scout. Reroll</blockquote>Get over yourself. If you want to MT, reroll a guard, cause if you rolled a monk to MT, then you are the one who missed the mark.As it currently stands, for most targets you need two fighters, no more. The raid gets worse, not better as you add more. And one of each subclass? I am beginning to wonder if we play the same game. I'm sure there's a bunch of high end raids out there that roll with six fighters . . .We are not talking about a scout role. Scouts cannot put an avoidance buff on the MT. Scouts do not have raidwide buffs. Scouts cannot take snap aggro and live long enough for a recovery/retransfer. Those are unique to fighters. But if you can have 30-50% more DPS, it's not worth it.

BChizzle

04-30-2009, 02:48 AM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>You contradicted what you have said again and again; you have said it only needs two tanks in raid.Even if monk had same survivability as other plate tanks, there is still no need to bring monk in with our current dps.You said guardian still has best survivability and guardian will be MT for sure. Sk/zerker/pal will still be better OT for aoe dps/aggro.Even if monk had same aoe/dps as sk/zerker/pal, the best result is that monk has to compete with sk/zker/pal for OT. Very poor result.</blockquote>You should seriously get a dictionary and look up the word 'need.' Once you understand the meaning of the word you used in your first 'sentence' come back and tell me where exactly me saying you can have 3 tanks in a raid means you 'need' 3 tanks in a raid. All you ever do is exaggerate and reach for things. You guys just don't get it, if we are a melee dps class then why not bring a scout, I mean seriously, are we supposed to have better buffs then a bard to or how about better debuffs then a brigand? Maybe we should do more dps then an assassin or have all the hate tricks of a swashy. Oh lets be the ranged fighter and we can use our satchels to do leet dps like a ranger. I bet we could get in raids then.

BChizzle

04-30-2009, 02:52 AM

<cite>Rythalian@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>We are not talking about a scout role. Scouts cannot put an avoidance buff on the MT. Scouts do not have raidwide buffs. Scouts cannot take snap aggro and live long enough for a recovery/retransfer. Those are unique to fighters. But if you can have 30-50% more DPS, it's not worth it.</blockquote>I bolded some stuff from your post, all of those things can be done by non-brawlers just as effectively if not more effectively then a brawler does it because they are better at surviving. Fact is unless you are in defensive its better to have a crusader avoid buff your MT and if you are asking for a dps role then your not in defensive and not avoid buffing much.

Couching

04-30-2009, 02:54 AM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Then you are not best monk since your tanking gear sucks. Come back when you have better gear for tanking. Monk is tank, not dpser.</blockquote>Since I produce enough agro to hold a mob off a raid that does probably 100k more dps then your raid I think it is safe to say I do my tanking bulling role great.</blockquote>So your raid wide dps is about 300k to 320k? Fix it for you.

BChizzle

04-30-2009, 03:00 AM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Then you are not best monk since your tanking gear sucks. Come back when you have better gear for tanking. Monk is tank, not dpser.</blockquote>Since I produce enough agro to hold a mob off a raid that does probably 100k more dps then your raid I think it is safe to say I do my tanking bulling role great.</blockquote>So your raid wide dps is about 300k to 320k? Fix it for you.</blockquote>Wow you fixed my post by putting in a word that has nothing to do with the subject, good job on that one /clap.

Couching

04-30-2009, 03:01 AM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>You contradicted what you have said again and again; you have said it only needs two tanks in raid.Even if monk had same survivability as other plate tanks, there is still no need to bring monk in with our current dps.You said guardian still has best survivability and guardian will be MT for sure. Sk/zerker/pal will still be better OT for aoe dps/aggro.Even if monk had same aoe/dps as sk/zerker/pal, the best result is that monk has to compete with sk/zker/pal for OT. Very poor result.</blockquote>You should seriously get a dictionary and look up the word 'need.' Once you understand the meaning of the word you used in your first 'sentence' come back and tell me where exactly me saying you can have 3 tanks in a raid means you 'need' 3 tanks in a raid. All you ever do is exaggerate and reach for things. You guys just don't get it, if we are a melee dps class then why not bring a scout, I mean seriously, are we supposed to have better buffs then a bard to or how about better debuffs then a brigand? Maybe we should do more dps then an assassin or have all the hate tricks of a swashy. Oh lets be the ranged fighter and we can use our satchels to do leet dps like a ranger. I bet we could get in raids then.</blockquote>You have said many times that 3rd tank is not NEEDED. Now, you said we CAN have 3 tanks in raids. Sure, we CAN have 6 tanks if we want.All you ever do is exaggerate and reach for things; perfect for you.That's why I am totally against your idea that 3rd tank is not needed. The fact is, 3rd tank could be handy with right raid content design.

Couching

04-30-2009, 03:05 AM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Then you are not best monk since your tanking gear sucks. Come back when you have better gear for tanking. Monk is tank, not dpser.</blockquote>Since I produce enough agro to hold a mob off a raid that does probably 100k more dps then your raid I think it is safe to say I do my tanking bulling role great.</blockquote>So your raid wide dps is about 300k to 320k? Fix it for you.</blockquote>Wow you fixed my post by putting in a word that has nothing to do with the subject, good job on that one /clap.</blockquote>Because you are bulling; your raidwide dps is not 100k more than our raidwide dps. Good job on making stuff up. /clap

BChizzle

04-30-2009, 03:20 AM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>You have said many times that 3rd tank is not NEEDED. Now, you said we CAN have 3 tanks in raids. Sure, we CAN have 6 tanks if we want.All you ever do is exaggerate and reach for things; perfect for you.That's why I am totally against your idea that 3rd tank is not needed. The fact is, 3rd tank could be handy with right raid content design.</blockquote>Wow you took my advice and looked up the word 'need'. Grats to you for expanding your horizon, now that you are moving up to a third grade level of reading comprehension maybe your mind will develop more soon and it will be time for you to realize you rolled a tank not a scout.Oh wait nevermind I spoke too soon on that last sentence there it seems you haven't totally grasped the word 'need' yet, see relating that a 3rd tank could be handy doesn't mean it is a 'need', back to the second grade for you.

Couching

04-30-2009, 03:30 AM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>You have said many times that 3rd tank is not NEEDED. Now, you said we CAN have 3 tanks in raids. Sure, we CAN have 6 tanks if we want.All you ever do is exaggerate and reach for things; perfect for you.That's why I am totally against your idea that 3rd tank is not needed. The fact is, 3rd tank could be handy with right raid content design.</blockquote>Wow you took my advice and looked up the word 'need'. Grats to you for expanding your horizon, now that you are moving up to a third grade level of reading comprehension maybe your mind will develop more soon and it will be time for you to realize you rolled a tank not a scout.Oh wait nevermind I spoke too soon on that last sentence there it seems you haven't totally grasped the word 'need' yet, see relating that a 3rd tank could be handy doesn't mean it is a 'need', back to the second grade for you.</blockquote>Need or not neeeded is all relative.For example, some guilds need 7 healers to beat tythus and some guilds need 5 healers. So how many healers are needed? 5? A lot of guilds can't beat it with only 5.It's really sad that your comprehesion is that low and can't understand it.The fact remains that even if monk had same survivability as plate tanks, why do you want to get monk when you have other 2 plate tanks already? Especially when this monk has as low as plate tanks in dps and worse or equal utility. That's the question from me and other monks. You just can't answer it.

BChizzle

04-30-2009, 03:34 AM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Then you are not best monk since your tanking gear sucks. Come back when you have better gear for tanking. Monk is tank, not dpser.</blockquote>Since I produce enough agro to hold a mob off a raid that does probably 100k more dps then your raid I think it is safe to say I do my tanking bulling role great.</blockquote>So your raid wide dps is about 300k to 320k? Fix it for you.</blockquote>Wow you fixed my post by putting in a word that has nothing to do with the subject, good job on that one /clap.</blockquote>Because you are bulling; your raidwide dps is not 100k more than our raidwide dps. Good job on making stuff up. /clap</blockquote>I think it is safe to say that when your guild takes almost 16 minutes of fighting to clear palace trash and mine takes 11 minutes that we are probably doing significantly more dps then you and its pretty close to 100k more. But hey it isnt an exact science right so lets say 75-100k more dps.

Couching

04-30-2009, 03:39 AM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Then you are not best monk since your tanking gear sucks. Come back when you have better gear for tanking. Monk is tank, not dpser.</blockquote>Since I produce enough agro to hold a mob off a raid that does probably 100k more dps then your raid I think it is safe to say I do my tanking bulling role great.</blockquote>So your raid wide dps is about 300k to 320k? Fix it for you.</blockquote>Wow you fixed my post by putting in a word that has nothing to do with the subject, good job on that one /clap.</blockquote>Because you are bulling; your raidwide dps is not 100k more than our raidwide dps. Good job on making stuff up. /clap</blockquote>I think it is safe to say that when your guild takes almost 16 minutes of fighting to clear palace trash and mine takes 11 minutes that we are probably doing significantly more dps then you and its pretty close to 100k more. But hey it isnt an exact science right so lets say 75-100k more dps.</blockquote>Are you kidding me to count raidwide dps based on a palace trash parse especially it's 23 ppls, guild assassin left raid earier on that parse?Ok, so our raid wide dps on gynok today was 194k and I was tanking gynok today. Show me your parse that your raid wide was 300k on gynok and you were tanking gynok.

BChizzle

04-30-2009, 03:45 AM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Need or not neeeded is all relative.For example, some guilds need 7 healers to beat tythus and some guilds need 5 healers. So how many healers are needed? 5? A lot of guilds can't beat it with only 5.It's really sad that your comprehesion is that low and can't understand it.The fact remains that even if monk had same survivability as plate tanks, why do you want to get monk when you have other 2 plate tanks already? Especially when this monk has as low as plate tanks in dps and worse or equal utility. That's the question from me and other monks. You just can't answer it.</blockquote>Actually it is a very simple answer, if there is no survivability difference then whether you have a plate tank or a leather tank becomes a non-issue and you just take the better player. OMG what a concept people getting spots in groups based upon how well they perform, whodathunkit? OMG more flexibility and choice in not having to bring a [Removed for Content] monk along that can't fulfill any role properly, whodathunkit?Now since I answered your question, answer mine, if we had better dps and were no longer tanks...Why not take a brigand/swashy who has better debuffs?Why not take a assassin/ranger who does more dps?Why not take a bard who brings better buffs?Keep in mind that since we are no longer tanks we should probably lose our raidwide, I can't see scouts agreeing to use being the only scout with a raidwide. And please don't say for our block buff, if you are dpsing you aren't in defensive so your block buff is pretty useless.

Couching

04-30-2009, 03:50 AM

BChizzle

04-30-2009, 03:56 AM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Are you kidding me to count raidwide dps based on a palace trash parse especially it's 23 ppls, guild assassin left raid earier on that parse?Ok, so our raid wide dps on gynok today was 194k and I was tanking gynok today. Show me your parse that your raid wide was 300k on gynok and you were tanking gynok.</blockquote>Wow don't you hit gynok for 40% hit rate? And they let you tank him? And since when is Gynok considered a whole raid, I thought he was just one mob. I tanked Gynok today too, and did 9k dps, how about you? What does that have to do with anything? Nothing right? But hey lets harp on the fact that my raidforce is superior to yours much like I am superior to you instead of the topic at hand, cause thats what you do right?

Couching

04-30-2009, 04:09 AM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Are you kidding me to count raidwide dps based on a palace trash parse especially it's 23 ppls, guild assassin left raid earier on that parse?Ok, so our raid wide dps on gynok today was 194k and I was tanking gynok today. Show me your parse that your raid wide was 300k on gynok and you were tanking gynok.</blockquote>Wow don't you hit gynok for 40% hit rate? And they let you tank him? And since when is Gynok considered a whole raid, I thought he was just one mob. I tanked Gynok today too, and did 9k dps, how about you? What does that have to do with anything? Nothing right? But hey lets harp on the fact that my raidforce is superior to yours much like I am superior to you instead of the topic at hand, cause thats what you do right?</blockquote>Wow weren't you pwnt hard by your guardian? And they let you tank gynok? And since when palace trash considered a whole raid? And why do you need to tank gynok? Because MT got owned? Wait, you have said your guild didn't need 3 tanks in that fight.The fact is that your guild raid 7 days a week and get gear faster than most guilds that didn't raid 7 days a week.Oh wait, but your tanking gear still sucks. Based on your post, people with better tanking gear are better players. Come back and show your [Removed for Content] when you get some gear and able to actually tank.

BChizzle

04-30-2009, 04:16 AM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Ok, but still, only 2 tanks in raid in your scenario. Monk is going to compete two tank slots in raids with others. Fine. At least it's fair.Next, if we had better dps and were no longer tanks .. was never my idea.I am waiting for someone to answer this question too.</blockquote>Great now that we are agreed on this lets go to the next thing I feel is misleading. The 2 tank thing. A quick look at most raid rosters will tell you most roll with 3-4 tanks. Not everyone can raid 100% of the time, the way loot drops work and what not it does make sense to have a brawler in the raid so that leather drops don't get wasted. Fact is a plate item drops the plates got to fight it out, kind of makes sense from a spread the loot around standpoint that a leather wearer has its benefits. Your guild in itself has 9 tanks(?), though some may be alts on non-raiders or whatever. Plus you have to make everyone happy right?So anyways in the real world most guilds don't go with the bare minimum. Mine rolls with 4 tanks, alot of the time we are all in the raid together tho recently we have been switching out the zerk for his dirge. Like I said it doesn't hurt to have more then 2 tanks, the flexibility is nice, where the hurt comes in is when a monk can't step up into the role any of the other tanks can perform, and currently where that is pretty much is tanking, see you can drop any dps in the raid replace them with healers replace them with dps wanna be tanks, you might not be as successful but you can still kill stuff, you can't have a raid without someone tanking and someone to heal that tank.

BChizzle

04-30-2009, 04:18 AM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Are you kidding me to count raidwide dps based on a palace trash parse especially it's 23 ppls, guild assassin left raid earier on that parse?Ok, so our raid wide dps on gynok today was 194k and I was tanking gynok today. Show me your parse that your raid wide was 300k on gynok and you were tanking gynok.</blockquote>Wow don't you hit gynok for 40% hit rate? And they let you tank him? And since when is Gynok considered a whole raid, I thought he was just one mob. I tanked Gynok today too, and did 9k dps, how about you? What does that have to do with anything? Nothing right? But hey lets harp on the fact that my raidforce is superior to yours much like I am superior to you instead of the topic at hand, cause thats what you do right?</blockquote>Wow weren't you pwnt hard by your guardian? And they let you tank gynok? And since when palace trash considered a whole raid? And why do you need to tank gynok? Because MT got owned? Wait, you have said your guild didn't need 3 tanks in that fight.The fact is that your guild raid 7 days a week and get gear faster than most guilds that didn't raid 7 days a week.Oh wait, but your tanking gear still sucks. Based on your post, people with better tanking gear are better players. Come back and show your [Removed for Content] when you get some gear and able to actually tank.</blockquote>LOL, here you go with the exaggerations again. Yes plainly being one of the best geared monks in this game makes my tanking gear suck.

Couching

04-30-2009, 04:30 AM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>LOL, here you go with the exaggerations again. Yes plainly being one of the best geared monks in this game makes my tanking gear suck.</blockquote>The fact remains, there are 3-4 monks who have better tanking gear than you including me. Based on your posts, we are better monks than you.

BChizzle

04-30-2009, 04:48 AM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>LOL, here you go with the exaggerations again. Yes plainly being one of the best geared monks in this game makes my tanking gear suck.</blockquote>The fact remains, there are 3-4 monks who have better tanking gear than you including me. Based on your posts, we are better monks than you.</blockquote>That is a completely asinine statement, but coming from you it is no surprise. The best tanks don't load up on safe gear, they push the line on risk/reward. End of the day I can stay alive tanking any mob you can and more while dpsing higher and holding more agro, when you tank the 7th Hammer successfully please come back and talk, it will be a while though, I am very sure of that.

Siatfallen

04-30-2009, 05:04 AM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Need or not neeeded is all relative.For example, some guilds need 7 healers to beat tythus and some guilds need 5 healers. So how many healers are needed? 5? A lot of guilds can't beat it with only 5.It's really sad that your comprehesion is that low and can't understand it.The fact remains that even if monk had same survivability as plate tanks, why do you want to get monk when you have other 2 plate tanks already? Especially when this monk has as low as plate tanks in dps and worse or equal utility. That's the question from me and other monks. You just can't answer it.</blockquote>Actually it is a very simple answer, if there is no survivability difference then whether you have a plate tank or a leather tank becomes a non-issue and you just take the better player. OMG what a concept people getting spots in groups based upon how well they perform, whodathunkit? OMG more flexibility and choice in not having to bring a [Removed for Content] monk along that can't fulfill any role properly, whodathunkit?Now since I answered your question, answer mine, if we had better dps and were no longer tanks...Why not take a brigand/swashy who has better debuffs?Why not take a assassin/ranger who does more dps?Why not take a bard who brings better buffs?Keep in mind that since we are no longer tanks we should probably lose our raidwide, I can't see scouts agreeing to use being the only scout with a raidwide. And please don't say for our block buff, if you are dpsing you aren't in defensive so your block buff is pretty useless.</blockquote>Since I'm often taken to be an advocate for this point of view, I guess I should answer, then:I'm not asking for brawlers to be turned into non-tanks. The objective is to keep us inferior as far as MTing is concerned. It's the RoK model, where sure, we can pull it off, but you'd pick a guardian for it over us any day.The rationale for bringing a brawler as the third fighter, then, is this:You can bring a plate fighter as the third, but barring fights where you'd want to do this because of scripts (Xebnok, Zarrakon, Maestro & Byzola off the top of my head), you probably wouldn't want to, since their DPS will be lower than that of a scout in the same spot - and they're really mostly there to pick things up if the MT goes down.Bring along the brawler instead, and what you're getting is comparable DPS to that of a rogue. You do not get the debuffs, but do get: - A raidwide buff & avoidance buff (I guess we should ask to have it be efficient while in offensive stance, too)- Emergency tanking capability (because both brawlers, with our wealth of emergency skills, can pick up an encounter and stay alive until the MT is back in line perfectly well) - A third fighter for the fights where those are needed anyway (aka, you don't have to gear up an extra tank for Zarrakon, as well as the scout toon usually in the raid force)I don't know about the rest of you, but the above was exactly what I had a spot on the raidforce for during RoK, and it worked perfectly well.If there's anyone out there who seriously wants the brawlers to be purist DPS, then I'm pretty sure they're not playing brawlers in the first place (I do remember some guardians arguing in favour of this on the in-testing forums though). I'm usually the proponent of the DPS aspect of this class, though, so I thought I'd compile the ideas here.One note: The difference between brawlers and guardians needs to remain obvious with this model; if it does not, we're just overpowered guardians with better buffs and higher DPS.Since I'm not exactly in endgame gear yet, I've no idea how hard it is for a brawler in the kind of gear provided there to tank the various raid instances and avatars. I'm guessing survivability is pretty much fine where it is now, because that's what it looks like with the kind of gear I have vs. the encounters corresponding to it. Perhaps a bit on the high end, courtesy of very onesided tSO AA choices, but certainly with a respectable distance to the plate fighters.All of the above are arguments for the raid level.Group instances: Bring a brawler if you want a fast instance run since they'll help get things dead faster, but make sure you've good healers for it.Soloing: This was ever a serious problem for brawlers?

ShinGoku

04-30-2009, 07:45 AM

Instead of this thread turning into a giant p**sing contest, hows about we stick to the problems at hand that we can all agree on? At least if we keep this contructive it won't get locked, even if it gets ignored:1) Our survivability is way behind that of the plate tanks. We all agree that if we are no longer the highest dps producing tank that our survivability should be brought up to be in line with that of the plates.2) If our destiny (as has been implied since launch) is to be the dps fighter of choice that hits harder than a plate but can't take the damage they can then our dps should be upped. This means we will be back as we were, whereby we couldn't take the beating a plate could but could out damage them and still manage to offtank.If we all get behind these two ideals and all sing the same song then perhaps our class could be fixed all the sooner.

Aull

04-30-2009, 09:45 AM

<cite>Rythalian@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>First off guys, this ain't that other site.Chizzle, what we have is a difference of vision, not a different view of the facts. Your vision is to keep brawler dps equal with other fighters and bring our survivability and threat up to par. (You agree, I take it, that they are currently not where they should be.)Many of us see it the other way around. We think there are enough tanks in the game, and we should have our DPS and utility brought up so that we once again have a viable place in raids in those roles.What you fail to acknowledge is that, for the ENTIRE course of EQ2, brawlers have been the "dps fighters." With the exception of zerkers and AoE dps, we have always, until now, had a meaningful dps advantage over every other fighter. Many of us rolled our characters, itemized them, played them, and grew used to them in THAT role.Now, we have equal dps with every other fighter and worse survivability and aoe aggro.I don't want to be just another tank (even though I like to tank). I want to be a brawler - I want to hit harder than other tanks and am willing to let them maintain the survivability edge. I think that's more interesting, more consistent with four and a half years of game history, and a better model for raid construction.</blockquote>Very well stated. This is what I have been wanting to say all along.

Couching

04-30-2009, 11:01 AM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>The fact remains, there are 3-4 monks who have better tanking gear than you including me. Based on your posts, we are better monks than you.</blockquote>That is a completely asinine statement, but coming from you it is no surprise. The best tanks don't load up on safe gear, they push the line on risk/reward. The best tanks don't load up on safe gear, they push the line on risk/reward. End of the day I can stay alive tanking any mob you can and more while dpsing higher and holding more agro, when you tank the 7th Hammer successfully please come back and talk, it will be a while though, I am very sure of that.</blockquote>That is a completely asinine statement, but coming from you it is no surprise. You always broke your words so fast. And you finally understood how asinine your post was; best monk becasue you have better gear.The fact is, anyone with war bp will deal more dps than with wu's bp. The fact is you don't have best tanking gear of the game.Also, the best tanks don't load up on safe gear is another completely asinine statement on heavy population severs; huge lag. The fact is you are playing in a low population server and it is an ez mode of this game; less lag.The fact is even you raid 7 days a week and play on a lag free server and we have the same tso instance raid progression. For justice, it will die when it pops. It remains the fact that I am better tank than you anytime.

Morgane

04-30-2009, 11:35 AM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Our dps is not fine. Our dps is 30%-40% behind T2 dps, and 60%-70% behind T1 dps. More important, our dps is not better than plate tanks and they have better survivability. We need better survivability and better dps.</blockquote>Agreed. Our guild leader is a Paladin and I can out parse him only about half the time. And that's AFTER he re-spec'd and saw a bit of a drop in his DPS. I have my T1 shard armor and he has his T2 set so maybe that can be the reason for some of the difference but with him spec'd for survivability and tanking and me spec'd with DPS, seems like I should be able to DPS better than a plate tank.I get that we are a hybrid class and should not DPS nor tank better than the classes specifically designed for those jobs but at this point we're fairly useless in a raid. I'm glad I'm not raiding right now because I think I'd be very very frustrated. As it is, I'll get passed over in PUGs time and time again if a bard or a plate tank are available. I think our avoidance is pretty ineffective atm and I'm not at all confident that we'll see many improvements to the class since we get passed over time and time again unless it's to nerf us in some way (Dev Fist nerfed, our raidwide speed buff nerfed, our epic nerfed).

Morgane

04-30-2009, 11:59 AM

<cite>Rythalian@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>I don't want to be just another tank (even though I like to tank). I want to be a brawler - I want to hit harder than other tanks and am willing to let them maintain the survivability edge. I think that's more interesting, more consistent with four and a half years of game history, and a better model for raid construction.</blockquote>Bravo! Well said.

NamaeZero

04-30-2009, 01:22 PM

<cite>Deranged wrote:</cite><blockquote><a href="list.m?topic_id=449820">Why do Monks always get Ignored and continue to WAIT?</a> </blockquote>Patient endurance of intense agony, apathy, disdain, and the evils of this world is the path of the Monk. That is the lesson we are being taught, knowingly or not.We Monks must flow like water around the problems of buggyy AA's, inadaquately or inferior combat arts, badly designed tanking ability, insufficient DPS, and nerfs. Only then can we achieve Enlightenment.

Zorastiz

04-30-2009, 01:35 PM

Have y'all tried playing a Summoner lately?That's a borked up class!

NamaeZero

04-30-2009, 01:52 PM

<cite>Zorastiz@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Have y'all tried playing a Summoner lately?That's a borked up class!</blockquote>That only means they are on a faster road to Enlightenment. We must control our jealousy of Summoners more transcendental share of suffering as well. AE aggro control, a role in raids, properly itemized equipment... a true Monk desires not these things! You have within you everything you need (except if you want to raid or do TSO content!)

BChizzle

04-30-2009, 06:12 PM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>The fact remains, there are 3-4 monks who have better tanking gear than you including me. Based on your posts, we are better monks than you.</blockquote>That is a completely asinine statement, but coming from you it is no surprise. The best tanks don't load up on safe gear, they push the line on risk/reward. The best tanks don't load up on safe gear, they push the line on risk/reward. End of the day I can stay alive tanking any mob you can and more while dpsing higher and holding more agro, when you tank the 7th Hammer successfully please come back and talk, it will be a while though, I am very sure of that.</blockquote>That is a completely asinine statement, but coming from you it is no surprise. You always broke your words so fast. And you finally understood how asinine your post was; best monk becasue you have better gear.The fact is, anyone with war bp will deal more dps than with wu's bp. The fact is you don't have best tanking gear of the game.Also, the best tanks don't load up on safe gear is another completely asinine statement on heavy population severs; huge lag. The fact is you are playing in a low population server and it is an ez mode of this game; less lag.The fact is even you raid 7 days a week and play on a lag free server and we have the same tso instance raid progression. For justice, it will die when it pops. It remains the fact that I am better tank than you anytime.</blockquote>Oh look you learned a new word good for you, aww and then you went again and used it wrong. As far as populations go a quick look pretty much shows that my server has a hell of a lot more raid guilds raiding TSO then yours. My guess is if you ever even kill Justice it will be months and months from now. Lets face it, you want to measure who is better, while I tank and kill stuff way before you, parse higher then you do, and pretty much don't talk about what I will do, I have already done it.

BChizzle

04-30-2009, 06:13 PM

<cite>Zorastiz@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Have y'all tried playing a Summoner lately?That's a borked up class!</blockquote>Agreed

BChizzle

04-30-2009, 06:19 PM

<cite>Morgane@Everfrost wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rythalian@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>I don't want to be just another tank (even though I like to tank). I want to be a brawler - I want to hit harder than other tanks and am willing to let them maintain the survivability edge. I think that's more interesting, more consistent with four and a half years of game history, and a better model for raid construction.</blockquote>Bravo! Well said.</blockquote>They have one of those, it is called a scout, you should roll one you would be much happier.

BChizzle

04-30-2009, 06:22 PM

<cite>Siatfallen wrote:</cite><blockquote>Since I'm often taken to be an advocate for this point of view, I guess I should answer, then:I'm not asking for brawlers to be turned into non-tanks. The objective is to keep us inferior as far as MTing is concerned. It's the RoK model, where sure, we can pull it off, but you'd pick a guardian for it over us any day.The rationale for bringing a brawler as the third fighter, then, is this:You can bring a plate fighter as the third, but barring fights where you'd want to do this because of scripts (Xebnok, Zarrakon, Maestro & Byzola off the top of my head), you probably wouldn't want to, since their DPS will be lower than that of a scout in the same spot - and they're really mostly there to pick things up if the MT goes down.Bring along the brawler instead, and what you're getting is comparable DPS to that of a rogue. You do not get the debuffs, but do get: - A raidwide buff & avoidance buff (I guess we should ask to have it be efficient while in offensive stance, too)- Emergency tanking capability (because both brawlers, with our wealth of emergency skills, can pick up an encounter and stay alive until the MT is back in line perfectly well) - A third fighter for the fights where those are needed anyway (aka, you don't have to gear up an extra tank for Zarrakon, as well as the scout toon usually in the raid force)I don't know about the rest of you, but the above was exactly what I had a spot on the raidforce for during RoK, and it worked perfectly well.If there's anyone out there who seriously wants the brawlers to be purist DPS, then I'm pretty sure they're not playing brawlers in the first place (I do remember some guardians arguing in favour of this on the in-testing forums though). I'm usually the proponent of the DPS aspect of this class, though, so I thought I'd compile the ideas here.One note: The difference between brawlers and guardians needs to remain obvious with this model; if it does not, we're just overpowered guardians with better buffs and higher DPS.Since I'm not exactly in endgame gear yet, I've no idea how hard it is for a brawler in the kind of gear provided there to tank the various raid instances and avatars. I'm guessing survivability is pretty much fine where it is now, because that's what it looks like with the kind of gear I have vs. the encounters corresponding to it. Perhaps a bit on the high end, courtesy of very onesided tSO AA choices, but certainly with a respectable distance to the plate fighters.All of the above are arguments for the raid level.Group instances: Bring a brawler if you want a fast instance run since they'll help get things dead faster, but make sure you've good healers for it.Soloing: This was ever a serious problem for brawlers?</blockquote>Eilien, you and I both know that you with more dps still isn't going to get you into your raids. And this is where you miss the point, as long as you are substandard when compared to Balkolth, Keigo, and Porph when it comes to tanking, when the time comes to sit a tank it is going to be you plain and simple.

Aull

04-30-2009, 07:27 PM

Brawlers are in a bad position no matter what. If they become as good as guards at tanking or if they become as good at dps as an sk there will still be no room for them in raids. These raid positions have already been solidifed through the years of the game.Of the six tanks four of them (plates) have good/great survivability and also can have the dps that equal/surpasses the two brawlers.Six tanks are to many. Eight dps slots do not need two more. The need to fit a brawler in any of these areas is pressing.Utility will be tough to counter because so many utility classes bring enough as it is leaving little room for brawlers improving anything.

BChizzle

04-30-2009, 08:03 PM

<cite>Aull wrote:</cite><blockquote>Brawlers are in a bad position no matter what. If they become as good as guards at tanking or if they become as good at dps as an sk there will still be no room for them in raids. These raid positions have already been solidifed through the years of the game.Of the six tanks four of them (plates) have good/great survivability and also can have the dps that equal/surpasses the two brawlers.Six tanks are to many. Eight dps slots do not need two more. The need to fit a brawler in any of these areas is pressing.Utility will be tough to counter because so many utility classes bring enough as it is leaving little room for brawlers improving anything.</blockquote>Raids don't need more dps classes either, so giving us dps does nothing. Quite simply if a monk can tank as good as other tanks when a spot comes up in an established guild they can replace a plate thats leaving, right now they can't.Let's put it this way, I can tank pretty much anything in my end game gear, however, plates can tank it better and it would take a monk months to catch up to what I am wearing. Why would a guild wait months when they can just slot in a plate and have him up to speed in a week?

Siatfallen

04-30-2009, 09:50 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Siatfallen wrote:</cite><blockquote>Since I'm often taken to be an advocate for this point of view, I guess I should answer, then:I'm not asking for brawlers to be turned into non-tanks. The objective is to keep us inferior as far as MTing is concerned. It's the RoK model, where sure, we can pull it off, but you'd pick a guardian for it over us any day.The rationale for bringing a brawler as the third fighter, then, is this:You can bring a plate fighter as the third, but barring fights where you'd want to do this because of scripts (Xebnok, Zarrakon, Maestro & Byzola off the top of my head), you probably wouldn't want to, since their DPS will be lower than that of a scout in the same spot - and they're really mostly there to pick things up if the MT goes down.Bring along the brawler instead, and what you're getting is comparable DPS to that of a rogue. You do not get the debuffs, but do get: - A raidwide buff & avoidance buff (I guess we should ask to have it be efficient while in offensive stance, too)- Emergency tanking capability (because both brawlers, with our wealth of emergency skills, can pick up an encounter and stay alive until the MT is back in line perfectly well) - A third fighter for the fights where those are needed anyway (aka, you don't have to gear up an extra tank for Zarrakon, as well as the scout toon usually in the raid force)I don't know about the rest of you, but the above was exactly what I had a spot on the raidforce for during RoK, and it worked perfectly well.If there's anyone out there who seriously wants the brawlers to be purist DPS, then I'm pretty sure they're not playing brawlers in the first place (I do remember some guardians arguing in favour of this on the in-testing forums though). I'm usually the proponent of the DPS aspect of this class, though, so I thought I'd compile the ideas here.One note: The difference between brawlers and guardians needs to remain obvious with this model; if it does not, we're just overpowered guardians with better buffs and higher DPS.Since I'm not exactly in endgame gear yet, I've no idea how hard it is for a brawler in the kind of gear provided there to tank the various raid instances and avatars. I'm guessing survivability is pretty much fine where it is now, because that's what it looks like with the kind of gear I have vs. the encounters corresponding to it. Perhaps a bit on the high end, courtesy of very onesided tSO AA choices, but certainly with a respectable distance to the plate fighters.All of the above are arguments for the raid level.Group instances: Bring a brawler if you want a fast instance run since they'll help get things dead faster, but make sure you've good healers for it.Soloing: This was ever a serious problem for brawlers?</blockquote>Eilien, you and I both know that you with more dps still isn't going to get you into your raids. And this is where you miss the point, as long as you are substandard when compared to Balkolth, Keigo, and Porph when it comes to tanking, when the time comes to sit a tank it is going to be you plain and simple.</blockquote>Actually, the argument often runs like this: Okay, we're surviving this fight now, but the mob is not dying fast enough - we need to sit a tank and get a DPS class in.At the moment, since having a monk in the raid actively costs it DPS, that's often me. Remove that factor, and we're suddenly talking about a different equation. In other words: It's recognised by most I assume as nice to have a third tank along for many fights. It's just that bit of extra survivability in case something asplodes on the raid. But to do so on harder content, you sacrifise DPS, and hence it is an option often avoided in order to get the mob dead in time (enrage timers ftw).The positive side of that argument is: There's a desire for a failsafe for the raid, to avoid wiping to minor mistakes, lag spikes (yay for playing on AB) and a wealth of other factors. The brawlers can, as it is, fulfill that role. Remove the detriment for doing so by bringing DPS to where it should be (that is, where it was in relation to other classes last expansion), add in some AE potential that both classes desperately need in the first place, and you have a class with a role in a raid force. To make it competitive with whoever else might try to take that spot (I'm thinking rogues and SKs here), give us survivability buffs for the other fighters, and a raidwide that's as useful as it used to be.This is one of the current strong arguments for bringing our SK on raids in the first place (specifically AE dps for him, but fundamentally the same idea) - but I can't say I see them being the class ideally suited for the role, if it wasn't because of broken class design.

BChizzle

04-30-2009, 10:04 PM

<cite>Siatfallen wrote:</cite><blockquote>Actually, the argument often runs like this: Okay, we're surviving this fight now, but the mob is not dying fast enough - we need to sit a tank and get a DPS class in.At the moment, since having a monk in the raid actively costs it DPS, that's often me. Remove that factor, and we're suddenly talking about a different equation. In other words: It's recognised by most I assume as nice to have a third tank along for many fights. It's just that bit of extra survivability in case something asplodes on the raid. But to do so on harder content, you sacrifise DPS, and hence it is an option often avoided in order to get the mob dead in time (enrage timers ftw).The positive side of that argument is: There's a desire for a failsafe for the raid, to avoid wiping to minor mistakes, lag spikes (yay for playing on AB) and a wealth of other factors. The brawlers can, as it is, fulfill that role. Remove the detriment for doing so by bringing DPS to where it should be (that is, where it was in relation to other classes last expansion), add in some AE potential that both classes desperately need in the first place, and you have a class with a role in a raid force. To make it competitive with whoever else might try to take that spot (I'm thinking rogues and SKs here), give us survivability buffs for the other fighters, and a raidwide that's as useful as it used to be.This is one of the current strong arguments for bringing our SK on raids in the first place (specifically AE dps for him, but fundamentally the same idea) - but I can't say I see them being the class ideally suited for the role, if it wasn't because of broken class design.</blockquote>Even with more dps you would still be sitting on the sideline as the 4th tank, sorry to break it to you, but ask your guild leaders why they sit you, it isn't because of your dps.

BChizzle

04-30-2009, 10:12 PM

Put it this way, Eilien is the rule not the exception. He is in an average guild that kills stuff, he was perfectly fine with his role in RoK because TBH the fights were much more simple and all he pretty much had to do was worry about 1 target, maybe pick up a mob for 12 seconds if his MT then OT went down and everyone patted him on the back on his good save. His guild now has stepped up and due to his inability to survive (And beleive me I saw it first hand as I watched him on Avatar of War) he is not included on fights and finds himself the odd man out. He fails to realize that his guild went out and actively recruited another plate tank not because they think he's not enough dps, but because he drops like he's made of paper.Fact is Eilien even if they gave you more dps your guild still wouldn't have you in raid because they would have to add another healer to the raid to keep you alive.

Siatfallen

05-01-2009, 12:44 AM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Put it this way, Eilien is the rule not the exception. He is in an average guild that kills stuff, he was perfectly fine with his role in RoK because TBH the fights were much more simple and all he pretty much had to do was worry about 1 target, maybe pick up a mob for 12 seconds if his MT then OT went down and everyone patted him on the back on his good save. His guild now has stepped up and due to his inability to survive (And beleive me I saw it first hand as I watched him on Avatar of War) he is not included on fights and finds himself the odd man out. He fails to realize that his guild went out and actively recruited another plate tank not because they think he's not enough dps, but because he drops like he's made of paper.Fact is Eilien even if they gave you more dps your guild still wouldn't have you in raid because they would have to add another healer to the raid to keep you alive.</blockquote>Mostly correct. A few notes:I'm an officer in said guild. I know perfectly well why I sit out, and it's often by my own vote, if not preference. I can be annoyed about it, but honestly, I can't pose much of an argument against it. That, if anything, is what really annoys me with where monks are atm. It's not that we can't tank well enough, or that we can't DPS well enough - it's that, within the fighter classes, we're inferior on both counts and hence really cannot even present a "but this is what the class would be better at here, even if you'd prefer something else".Your model is certainly viable, I just don't like it. Brawlers, I believe, were not designed to be mainstay tanks on raids, and I'd prefer to keep this class vision. Saying it's impossible is nonsense - the devs can adjust the class any way they see fit, they proved that (most recently) with the launch of tSO - the question is simply how much of what the class would need to give it a viable raid spot, and then if the devs are going to be willing to make said changes. On that front, for both our points of view, things look rather bleak at the moment, which is a real problem because it means I'll be arguing with you here until the next expansion hits. Hey, not that I mind, but it's the same things we're going over time and time again, which is a bit sad.We did not recruit a new fighter. The SK we had in the guild took over my spot (he came back from hiatus recently). Not that it makes much of a difference for your argument, but just to keep the record straight. I guess it does say something (perfectly obvious) about class balance.RoK and saves: It was initially more a case of "oops, I accidentially ripped & tanked Phara Dar in offensive gear and stance... I guess that works". This was after getting mythicals of course, and tanking suddenly seemed, a lot more viable. I hadn't realised how much so previously, because I'd been told since KoS (when I started raiding) that holding a raid spot as a monk was done by outparsing the rogues. Luckily, the swashbuckler we had in divinity at the time wasn't, well... I kept the raid spot for the latter part of KoS and all EoF that way.Mind = A bit one-tracked at that point. If you want a model figure for the purist DPS monk, myself during late EoF would probably be pretty much spot on. Going through the latter parts of RoK, especially SoH, saw me tanking a lot more, and I liked the balance between the two roles over all. It did feel like playing two classes at once at times - that's sadly not exactly how things look in tSO.Blabla, history lesson over for now.Single target in RoK vs. multi-target in tSO: Yep, that pretty much ruins a monk's chance of tanking much of anything this time around. Our AE aggro (and, at least from my perspective, DPS) is a major point of concern. It does, however, not by necessity have much to do with our survivability.Survivability and extra healers: It depends on the fight I suppose. You've tanked avatars, I have not. For the content I have tanked, even putting me in the MT group (guard/monk/templar/mystic/dirge/coercer) seems to work actually - I'm there instead of the warden or swashbuckler. This is not our normal setup for Xebnok, but doing so there actually works.Zarrakon (where I'm the only fighter in the group for obvious reasons), well, we run with 8 priests anyway, two per group, mostly because it's one mob in its own zone anyway, and getting the adds memwiped to the solo healer is usually trouble anyway.Penta-/Ultaclypse: They gimped the adds. Since we burn down two, staying alive against one of the others isn't really a problem.

Couching

05-01-2009, 01:31 AM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Oh look you learned a new word good for you, aww and then you went again and used it wrong. As far as populations go a quick look pretty much shows that my server has a hell of a lot more raid guilds raiding TSO then yours. My guess is if you ever even kill Justice it will be months and months from now. Lets face it, you want to measure who is better, while I tank and kill stuff way before you, parse higher then you do, and pretty much don't talk about what I will do, I have already done it.</blockquote>Yawn, it's you made that dumb statement; who has better gear is better monk. You just slapped your face again and again.You don't even know what the population means? Your excuse is so funny. Haha, please keep entertaining us.Beside, you changed the standard again; Who beated encounters earlier is better monk. Too bad, there are tons of guilds that have done TSO encounters earlier than yours. You are still not what you claimed; best monk in this game. The fact is, both of your statements are dumb. Too bad, even with those dumb statements, you are just an average monk. Maybe you have a chance to be better in the next xpac.

BChizzle

05-01-2009, 01:49 AM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Yawn, it's you made that dumb statement; who has better gear is better monk. You just slapped your face again and again.You don't even know what the population means? Your excuse is so funny. Haha, please keep entertaining us.Beside, you changed the standard again; Who beated encounters earlier is better monk. Too bad, there are tons of guilds that have done TSO encounters earlier than yours. You are still not what you claimed; best monk in this game. The fact is, both of your statements are dumb. Too bad, even with those dumb statements, you are just an average monk. Maybe you have a chance to be better in the next xpac.</blockquote>It is very simple, I am superior to you in every way. Anything you can bring up I did it before you and do it better then you. It isn't even close, but hey what should anyone suspect out of someone who can't even realize the difference between scout or tank when they are at the character select. As far as the next xpac goes I'll own you in that one, pretty much the only face getting slapped here is yours.

Sirhk

05-01-2009, 03:59 AM

You guys need to just settle down. We are tanks, have been since day one of the game. We always had more dps than other tanks, but not alot more than zerks. They lowered our survivability in T5 because honestly we were OP but our dps stayed better. But we were always tanks.What we need is exactly what Bchizzle said, more tanking skills. Maybe a slight downward tweak on other fighters dps but not a major increase to ours. I'm not killing avatars but I do just fine tanking and dpsing in my guild. I tank anything my plate tanks can (multi mob trash encounters suck though) and my dps is high enough I never worry about sitting. The new SK beats me on the parse sometimes but only if he has a dirge and I don't. .We need some tweaks. We don't need to be made scouts or plate tanks. Overall I think we need more aoe threat, 1 more defensive ability(not avoidance based), slightly more survivability and then maybe 1 extra buff to be put on tanks only. Maybe a stoneskin or deflect buff that works off a successful riposte or block.We don't need to be scouts, because like B said, we will just have more competition for raid slots.Thats all I got.Remember to breath when you argue on the internet folks.

Editedmind

05-01-2009, 08:31 AM

Okay... So I get that BChizzle is the best monk in the entire game. But wouldn't that mean he's lost touch with the rest of the other lowly monks that could never hope to hold a candle to his glory. Obviously it would be much more fair to compare BChizzle to the very best of each other class when making comparisons, because his case cannot possibly hold true for at least 99% of the other monks out there, and he's even far superior than that last 1%.I'm not saying the input isn't valid, it just isn't helpful. Now moving on, there have been some clever suggestions made inbetween all that arguing going on. What I know of monk is that it's always been far more of a hybrid class than any of the plate tanks, and rather than pushing us all one way or the other towards DPS, utility, or tanking, I think it's far more important to build upon our hybrid aspect. Our stances should be enough to switch us between roles, where we can do fine as tanks in defensive, dps in offensive, and utility in spider stance. Obviously while you're in one stance, say defensive, it shouldn't allow you to DPS like a rogue but you should be able to survive and tank almost as well as a plate. While in offensive we should be able to DPS almost as well as a rogue, but without anything close to the survivability of a plate. The spider stance line would be average, making monks average in everything, and then maybe a nice extra little group/raid bonus to boot. I liked how an earlier post in this thread split it up with straight percentages, instead of the mixed soup of increases and decreases on our stances currently, which only obfuscates their purpose to the class.Unparalleled versatility should be why people pick monks above other classes.

Aull

05-01-2009, 10:03 AM

If most players seen a paladin, sk, guardian, or zerker with their shields and plate armor standing beside a monk or bruiser and were asked "who is the tank" most would opt for the plate wearing fighter. Even though brawlers are a fighter class most make the assumption they are not just by appearance.Better tanking or better dps will still leave both brawlers in a no win situation. There was never a need for six tanks and the competition as to who gets to drive (mt) and who calls shotgun (ot) still leaves four fighters sitting out. It has been said before there is no reason to have all six fighters in a raid.Dps slots are full and no reason to add brawlers to that mix.

Lethe5683

05-01-2009, 10:42 AM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Lethe5683 wrote:</cite><blockquote>That BChizzle is actually a guardian posting under a false forum name or else a exceptionally stupid brawler.</blockquote>Don't make it personal, I am 20 times the brawler you would ever hope to be. Fact is there is a portion of the monk community that want to be DPS'ers, that is horrible of an idea we are tanks not dps they need to fix our tanking ability. If you want to dps and be a weak tank roll a brig.</blockquote>If your posts here are anything to judge by you are not a good brawler and are doing nothing but spreading false information on the forums making it more difficult for the devs. And when did I ever say that I wanted to DPS?</blockquote>Why don't you just move along already, you are obviously bringing nothing to the table but snappy comments without any content. The fact is I am pretty much the best monk in this game hands down, I obviously know the class better then most and have watched for years while people use hyperbole on our issues acting like the sky is falling asking for the world when all we ever need are just some simple tweaks.Fix our tanking and you fix the monk problem plain and simple, give us dps and you create an even further imbalance.</blockquote>

Morgane

05-01-2009, 01:09 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>They have one of those, it is called a scout, you should roll one you would be much happier.</blockquote>Thank you for your advice, BChiz! You know, you're absolutely right. I could never hope to be as all-knowing and uber as you so I will simply re-roll, leave my Monk collecting dust on the shelf, and make a sacrifice to the Norrathian Gods so that I, too, may one day be as great as you.::::::::::::::: I'm not worthy::::::::::::::: I'm not worthy:::::::::::::: I'm not worthy:::::::::::::::::*sigh*No rebuttal here, Chizzy. Better people than I have attempted it and failed. Head, meet brick wall.Cheerio, mate.

Morgane

05-01-2009, 01:18 PM

<cite>Sirhk wrote:</cite><blockquote>What we need is exactly what Bchizzle said, more tanking skills. Maybe a slight downward tweak on other fighters dps but not a major increase to ours.</blockquote>But... how is that going to make us more desirable in raids? It sounds as if you are calling for a nerf to the other fighter classes so that we can be equal or better at DPS (which we should be since we are the DPS FIGHTER CLASS). And even if the devs decide to nerf the other fighter classes to accommodate Monks (highly unlikely) then exactly how is that going to "fix" us? And for that matter, how are more tanking skills going to help? I can gurantee you that plate tanks will still get the preference. The game is way too old now to shift an entire player base's thinking about that. Plate tanks have more survivability (except for the 1% of uber Monks like BChizzle) and will get picked over Monks 90% of the time.

BChizzle

05-01-2009, 02:10 PM

<cite>Morgane@Everfrost wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Sirhk wrote:</cite><blockquote>What we need is exactly what Bchizzle said, more tanking skills. Maybe a slight downward tweak on other fighters dps but not a major increase to ours.</blockquote>But... how is that going to make us more desirable in raids? It sounds as if you are calling for a nerf to the other fighter classes so that we can be equal or better at DPS (which we should be since we are the DPS FIGHTER CLASS). And even if the devs decide to nerf the other fighter classes to accommodate Monks (highly unlikely) then exactly how is that going to "fix" us? And for that matter, how are more tanking skills going to help? I can gurantee you that plate tanks will still get the preference. The game is way too old now to shift an entire player base's thinking about that. Plate tanks have more survivability (except for the 1% of uber Monks like BChizzle) and will get picked over Monks 90% of the time.</blockquote>We aren't the DPS FIGHTER CLASS. The whole notion of that is completely imbalanced and is the reason why people are all up in arms about our DPS. If they upped our dps they would have to drop our tanking to balance things, like I said at that point why not just roll a scout? I mean seriously do you guys think they are going to give us scout/caster dps and scout/casters aren't going to be furious that we have the same dps but can tank things? Like I said more dps isn't the answer, being viable tanks is the answer.

BChizzle

05-01-2009, 02:15 PM

<cite>Aull wrote:</cite><blockquote>If most players seen a paladin, sk, guardian, or zerker with their shields and plate armor standing beside a monk or bruiser and were asked "who is the tank" most would opt for the plate wearing fighter. Even though brawlers are a fighter class most make the assumption they are not just by appearance.Better tanking or better dps will still leave both brawlers in a no win situation. There was never a need for six tanks and the competition as to who gets to drive (mt) and who calls shotgun (ot) still leaves four fighters sitting out. It has been said before there is no reason to have all six fighters in a raid.Dps slots are full and no reason to add brawlers to that mix.</blockquote>You comments are completely irrelevant. A plate tank can put on a gi appearance slot and look like a monk with a shield. What a toon looks like shouldn't be the main factor in their effectiveness. Fact is as tanks we are competing 1 vs 6 for a spot, as dps we would be competing 1 out of 13.

Morrolan V

05-01-2009, 02:47 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Aull wrote:</cite><blockquote>If most players seen a paladin, sk, guardian, or zerker with their shields and plate armor standing beside a monk or bruiser and were asked "who is the tank" most would opt for the plate wearing fighter. Even though brawlers are a fighter class most make the assumption they are not just by appearance.Better tanking or better dps will still leave both brawlers in a no win situation. There was never a need for six tanks and the competition as to who gets to drive (mt) and who calls shotgun (ot) still leaves four fighters sitting out. It has been said before there is no reason to have all six fighters in a raid.Dps slots are full and no reason to add brawlers to that mix.</blockquote>You comments are completely irrelevant. A plate tank can put on a gi appearance slot and look like a monk with a shield. What a toon looks like shouldn't be the main factor in their effectiveness. Fact is as tanks we are competing 1 vs 6 for a spot, as dps we would be competing 1 out of 13.</blockquote>Definitely - it's better to be one of six classes competing for 2 or 3 raid slots, instead of one of 12 classes competing for 8 to 10 slots. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/2786c5c8e1a8be796fb2f726cca5a0fe.gif" border="0" /> Oh, and did I mention that for the large majority of the time the game has been out the REALITY and PERCEPTION has been that brawlers are not good choices for raid tank slots?Six tank classes is too many. There is no reason brawlers can't have dps near or equal the level of rogues. At that level, the differentiated buffs and utility that a brawler brings means that it is at least a viable decision to bring a brawler instead of a second or third swash or brig.Chizzle, you may be the best monk in the game - I have no way of really judging that. You have great gear, you are in a hardcore raiding guild, I am sure you play your class effectively. The fact is, though, that whether or not that is true is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT to this discussion. Your opinion is no more valid or invalid than many others'. In point of fact, your opinions are no doubt colored by your experiences raiding in avatar gear with a raid force that is similarly equipped, which means that your view of the world is very, very far removed from that of the average brawler, even the average raiding brawler.At the end of the day, I care less how this debate is decided, even though I do feel strongly about it, than that it GETS decided and implemented. If they want to make Monks uber tanks with survivability on par with guardians, I'll play that role. Hell, if they want to give me a bunch of group buffs on par with a troub or a dirge and make us utility, I can play that role too. I just don't think either of those is the best decision for the game. Right now, though, we have equal single target DPS with other fighters, worse AoE dps than many, worse survivability and the worst aoe aggro control of any fighter. They (the devs) need to pick a direction for the class and go. Which direction is of secondary importance.

Morgane

05-01-2009, 02:51 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>You comments are completely irrelevant. A plate tank can put on a gi appearance slot and look like a monk with a shield. What a toon looks like shouldn't be the main factor in their effectiveness. Fact is as tanks we are competing 1 vs 6 for a spot, as dps we would be competing 1 out of 13.</blockquote>Personally, I'm not arguing (much) for a DPS or a tank slot. I would prefer to remain a hybrid class (reason I picked the Monk to begin with). Thing is, there is a great big perception out there, gamewide, that Monks can't tank as well as other tank classes. And we all know that Monks CAN tank (but not in raids) but you have to be pretty good to tank with a Monk (our aoe taunts suck and we don't do high enough DPS in Defensive stance to hold aggro very easily) and I'd venture to say about 80% of us (and in this I include myself) who don't tank well enough to dispell the myth.I don't see that belief changing at this point even if they DO make us better tanks. Therefore, I'd rather not be strong-armed into a tanking roll because then I'll NEVER get a group or a raid spot. At least now I can produce some pretty decent DPS. I mean serioulsy, how many of us have seen well-geared Monks two and three-shotted in a raid and/or TSO instance? Example is when the MT goes down and then the OT (in a raid anyway)goes down too. Raid leader is like "cool, the Monk's got i... nevermind, Monk's down..." That's happened so often and for so long I just don't see the player's perceptions changing. Maybe I'm wrong. /shrugI'm not asking to be a scout. I'm not asking to be a tank. I'm asking to be the fighter class we were meant to be and the reason I picked the class.... a hybrid fighter class that can do a little of both and have the ability to do it well. Not better than the classes meant for one specific job, but if I'm in my offensive stance then I'd dam well better be doing more DPS than the tank! And if I'm in my defensive stance, then my healer shouldn't be needing Xanax by the end of the fight.That's all I'm sayin.Edited for typos

BChizzle

05-01-2009, 03:20 PM

<cite>Morgane@Everfrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>Personally, I'm not arguing (much) for a DPS or a tank slot. I would prefer to remain a hybrid class (reason I picked the Monk to begin with). Thing is, there is a great big perception out there, gamewide, that Monks can't tank as well as other tank classes. And we all know that Monks CAN tank (but not in raids) but you have to be pretty good to tank with a Monk (our aoe taunts suck and we don't do high enough DPS in Defensive stance to hold aggro very easily) and I'd venture to say about 80% of us (and in this I include myself) who don't tank well enough to dispell the myth.I don't see that belief changing at this point even if they DO make us better tanks. Therefore, I'd rather not be strong-armed into a tanking roll because then I'll NEVER get a group or a raid spot. At least now I can produce some pretty decent DPS. I mean serioulsy, how many of us have seen well-geared Monks two and three-shotted in a raid and/or TSO instance? Example is when the MT goes down and then the OT (in a raid anyway)goes down too. Raid leader is like "cool, the Monk's got i... nevermind, Monk's down..." That's happened so often and for so long I just don't see the player's perceptions changing. Maybe I'm wrong. /shrugI'm not asking to be a scout. I'm not asking to be a tank. I'm asking to be the fighter class we were meant to be and the reason I picked the class.... a hybrid fighter class that can do a little of both and have the ability to do it well. Not better than the classes meant for one specific job, but if I'm in my offensive stance then I'd dam well better be doing more DPS than the tank! And if I'm in my defensive stance, then my healer shouldn't be needing Xanax by the end of the fight.That's all I'm sayin.Edited for typos</blockquote>You are being completely short sited, prior to this expansion pretty much 95% of sk's would be thought of the same way. SK was the joke of the tank class and guess what a year later they aren't, perceptions are easy to change.

BChizzle

05-01-2009, 03:26 PM

<cite>Rythalian@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Definitely - it's better to be one of six classes competing for 2 or 3 raid slots, instead of one of 12 classes competing for 8 to 10 slots. </blockquote>LOL except 12 classes that you will be competing with you are superior to you in every way. Quite simply under your scenario you might as well brig an extra brigand for the debuffs.

Morgane

05-01-2009, 03:31 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>You are being completely short sited, prior to this expansion pretty much 95% of sk's would be thought of the same way. SK was the joke of the tank class and guess what a year later they aren't, perceptions are easy to change.</blockquote>*sigh*And you are being completely stubborn.The Monk is a hybrid class. Period. End of subject. I don't want my monk to become a pure tank class nor do I want her to become a pure DPS class. I rolled her and spent months on her because she is a HYBRID class. If you want to be a tank and you think making us more "tank-y" will fix all our issues, then go re-roll yourself. Be a guardian or a pally or a zerker.Ya know, Chizzy, it's just jim dandy fine for you to tell us your opinion and even to feel very strongly about it. Quite a few of us, however, have different opinions from you. Because our opinions differ from yours does not, contrary to what you seem to believe, make everyone else's ideas and thoughts "irrelevant" or "short-sighted" or whatever else you've come up with. You've totally hijacked this thread with your never-ending, ad-naseum instistence that you are right and we are wrong.I think it's pretty safe to say we all know your position on this. Stop hijacking the thread with your "I have to be right - THIS is how it should be" comments after every poster who disagrees with you.

BChizzle

05-01-2009, 03:35 PM

<cite>Morgane@Everfrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>*sigh*And you are being completely stubborn.The Monk is a hybrid class. Period. End of subject. I don't want my monk to become a pure tank class nor do I want her to become a pure DPS class. I rolled her and spent months on her because she is a HYBRID class. If you want to be a tank and you think making us more "tank-y" will fix all our issues, then go re-roll yourself. Be a guardian or a pally or a zerker.Ya know, Chizzy, it's just jim dandy fine for you to tell us your opinion and even to feel very strongly about it. Quite a few of us, however, have different opinions from you. Because our opinions differ from yours does not, contrary to what you seem to believe, make everyone else's ideas and thoughts "irrelevant" or "short-sighted" or whatever else you've come up with. You've totally hijacked this thread with your never-ending, ad-naseum instistence that you are right and we are wrong.I think it's pretty safe to say we all know your position on this. Stop hijacking the thread with your "I have to be right - THIS is how it should be" comments after every poster who disagrees with you.</blockquote>Fact is you chose a tank class when you were act character select not hybrid. There is no such thing as a class called hybrid.

Morgane

05-01-2009, 03:58 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Fact is you chose a tank class when you were act character select not hybrid. There is no such thing as a class called hybrid.</blockquote>If you mean the "fighter" class...Oh nevermind.IMPLIED FACEPALM: When something is so dumb a full and proper facepalm is not even needed.<img src="http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w135/jhawk37750/tommyleejonesfacepalm.jpg" />

BChizzle

05-01-2009, 05:17 PM

<cite>Morgane@Everfrost wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Fact is you chose a tank class when you were act character select not hybrid. There is no such thing as a class called hybrid.</blockquote>If you mean the "fighter" class...Oh nevermind.IMPLIED FACEPALM: When something is so dumb a full and proper facepalm is not even needed.<img src="http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w135/jhawk37750/tommyleejonesfacepalm.jpg" /></blockquote>Fighter = tank

Morrolan V

05-01-2009, 06:15 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Fighter = tank</blockquote>Wrong. That's an incredibly narrow and shortsighted view of the class.If fighters are only supposed to be tanking, why is there an secondary avoidance buff? Why does the monk enhance tranquil vision line expressly allow a monk to transfer hate to another fighter? Why does Dragoon Reflexes protect all the NON-tank fighters in a group or raid from AoEs?If there are no hybrid classes, why does SoE have gear that says, right in it's description, that it's for hybrid classes?You can have your dogmatic view, but pithy little statements do not an argument make.

Couching

05-01-2009, 06:50 PM

Monk should have better single target dps than any plate tanks and our survivability should be about equal as aoe plate tanks (offensive plate tanks).That's how this game was at launch; Brawler is t3 dps and we can tank all content as other fighters.It's dumb to ask same survivability and dps as guardian. If anyone wana play a guardian clone, he should play a guardian.

Aull

05-01-2009, 07:26 PM

NamaeZero

05-01-2009, 07:55 PM

<cite>Aull wrote:</cite><blockquote>Yeah and a brawler can't use plate appearance. Unless something has changed since I examined it.So basically if I was looking at a wolf beside a lamb and someone asked me which one is the predator I should be able to tell the difference.</blockquote>Actually with the addition of Station Cash armor sets, it's possible and likely for any class to wear whatever armor it likes. Even as early as the Bloodlines adventure pack Monks could pick up and wear the nice shiny Mithaniel Marr appearance armor set for finishing just three BC quests.I'm currently holding my breath for the debut of appearance slot specific weapons. I think Zen Archery style monk would be awesome.

BChizzle

05-01-2009, 08:04 PM

<cite>Rythalian@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Fighter = tank</blockquote>Wrong. That's an incredibly narrow and shortsighted view of the class.If fighters are only supposed to be tanking, why is there an secondary avoidance buff? Why does the monk enhance tranquil vision line expressly allow a monk to transfer hate to another fighter? Why does Dragoon Reflexes protect all the NON-tank fighters in a group or raid from AoEs?If there are no hybrid classes, why does SoE have gear that says, right in it's description, that it's for hybrid classes?You can have your dogmatic view, but pithy little statements do not an argument make.</blockquote>Way to grasp at straws to make an argument. Fighters are the tanks of EQ2 PERIOD your twisting things in your fantasy world isn't going to change that. Fighter = Tank we aren't a dps class and grats to Couching trying with the tier stuff that absolutely doesn't apply to EQ2 anymore, in that case they can leave our dps where it is and nerf all the classes massively around us.

Aull

05-01-2009, 08:40 PM

<cite>NamaeZero wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Aull wrote:</cite><blockquote>Yeah and a brawler can't use plate appearance. Unless something has changed since I examined it.So basically if I was looking at a wolf beside a lamb and someone asked me which one is the predator I should be able to tell the difference.</blockquote>Actually with the addition of Station Cash armor sets, it's possible and likely for any class to wear whatever armor it likes. Even as early as the Bloodlines adventure pack Monks could pick up and wear the nice shiny Mithaniel Marr appearance armor set for finishing just three BC quests.I'm currently holding my breath for the debut of appearance slot specific weapons. I think Zen Archery style monk would be awesome.</blockquote>Interesting.

Aull

05-01-2009, 08:59 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Morgane@Everfrost wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Sirhk wrote:</cite><blockquote>What we need is exactly what Bchizzle said, more tanking skills. Maybe a slight downward tweak on other fighters dps but not a major increase to ours.</blockquote>But... how is that going to make us more desirable in raids? It sounds as if you are calling for a nerf to the other fighter classes so that we can be equal or better at DPS (which we should be since we are the DPS FIGHTER CLASS). And even if the devs decide to nerf the other fighter classes to accommodate Monks (highly unlikely) then exactly how is that going to "fix" us? And for that matter, how are more tanking skills going to help? I can gurantee you that plate tanks will still get the preference. The game is way too old now to shift an entire player base's thinking about that. Plate tanks have more survivability (except for the 1% of uber Monks like BChizzle) and will get picked over Monks 90% of the time.</blockquote>We aren't the DPS FIGHTER CLASS. The whole notion of that is completely imbalanced and is the reason why people are all up in arms about our DPS. If they upped our dps they would have to drop our tanking to balance things, like I said at that point why not just roll a scout? I mean seriously do you guys think they are going to give us scout/caster dps and scout/casters aren't going to be furious that we have the same dps but can tank things? Like I said more dps isn't the answer, being viable tanks is the answer.</blockquote>Ok this is where I get confused. Years ago both brawler's dps was higher than the plate tanks in solo, group, or raid scenes. I would venture to say that most monks and bruisers witnessed this and that is where most are basing their vision of the brawler class. Just look at brawler aa's when they came out. They actually had a de-threat included because brawlers at one time with just dps could pull aggro off the plates. Hence brawlers had at one time better dps potential.Brawlers then could tank but only the good geared and skilled ones did it effectively. This is where brawlers are having issues with the class. While we could tank at times our dps was our strong point. Back in the day when a dps class was not available a brawler could fill that spot with relative ease.While rogues are generally used for debuffs, utility, and dps they too can tank even though they do not possess all the taunts that fighters get. If we want to talk hybrids then rogues fit that description well.

Morrolan V

05-01-2009, 09:15 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Way to grasp at straws to make an argument. Fighters are the tanks of EQ2 PERIOD your twisting things in your fantasy world isn't going to change that. Fighter = Tank we aren't a dps class and grats to Couching trying with the tier stuff that absolutely doesn't apply to EQ2 anymore, in that case they can leave our dps where it is and nerf all the classes massively around us.</blockquote>You're the one in the fantasy world if you think that brawlers are ever going to be on an even playing field with plate tanks in competing for tank roles.

BChizzle

05-01-2009, 09:21 PM

<cite>Aull wrote:</cite><blockquote>Ok this is where I get confused. Years ago both brawler's dps was higher than the plate tanks in solo, group, or raid scenes. I would venture to say that most monks and bruisers witnessed this and that is where most are basing their vision of the brawler class. Just look at brawler aa's when they came out. They actually had a de-threat included because brawlers at one time with just dps could pull aggro off the plates. Hence brawlers had at one time better dps potential.Brawlers then could tank but only the good geared and skilled ones did it effectively. This is where brawlers are having issues with the class. While we could tank at times our dps was our strong point. Back in the day when a dps class was not available a brawler could fill that spot with relative ease.While rogues are generally used for debuffs, utility, and dps they too can tank even though they do not possess all the taunts that fighters get. If we want to talk hybrids then rogues fit that description well.</blockquote>Back then plates also had more avoidance then us too and we weren't able to buff up to chain levels of mitigation. Are you suggesting they also completely change our EPIC and all our avoidance stuff as well? Like I said you can't have both and if you make brawlers a DPS class they need to be pure DPS you can't have everything and call it balanced or else why not just make dev fist pop EPICS for 100% dmg and then we could just go out and solo raid zones.

BChizzle

05-01-2009, 09:23 PM

<cite>Rythalian@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Way to grasp at straws to make an argument. Fighters are the tanks of EQ2 PERIOD your twisting things in your fantasy world isn't going to change that. Fighter = Tank we aren't a dps class and grats to Couching trying with the tier stuff that absolutely doesn't apply to EQ2 anymore, in that case they can leave our dps where it is and nerf all the classes massively around us.</blockquote>You're the one in the fantasy world if you think that brawlers are ever going to be on an even playing field with plate tanks in competing for tank roles.</blockquote>Because history doesn't prove me right, sorry to tell you but before they scrapped the fighter changes that is exactly what was happening, beyond that RIGHT now bruisers are just as efficient as plate tanks in tanking roles.

Editedmind

05-01-2009, 09:42 PM

There never was a "tank" option for selecting your class on character creation when the game came out. Actually you started out as a refugee, and then you could choose your archetype in game, and progress on to choosing your subclass later, followed by your class.The progression of those quests started very broad, along the lines of "now you can be an adventurer, blah blah blah!" to "A fighter is a trained combatant that kills and protects.." to "Brawlers hone their bodies into weapons and channel inner spiritual powers to produce magical like effects!" eventually describing monk roughly as a class that can do a bunch of varried stuff. The game used to be a lot different, and it's easy to forget that we have a lot of elemental combat arts, considering how mitagation was, and how our lightning hand attack went from a perma buff, to a temp buff, to a sort of lame and limited combat art with 8 triggers.Monks had very unique DPS among the other classes right from the start. As the game changed, our DPS was tweaked and nerfed here and there, now we're lagging behind all the other fighter classes and that's not a problem?A monk was, is partially, and should be a hybrid class. Not in what it's called, but because of how it should function, instead of losing sight of what made the class, which is a whole lot more than just tanking. This is because a monk should be able to do a whole lot more than a guardian can ever do, but a guardian should be able to tank far better than any other class in the game can dream of.Furthermore, it is incredibly short sighted tp pigeonhole classes based on their archetype. Is an assassin a utility/buff class? Or are bards supposed to be DPS classes? Because according to BChizzle, there are only four classes/jobs in the game, and they're devided up into "flavors"...

BChizzle

05-01-2009, 11:40 PM

<cite>Editedmind wrote:</cite><blockquote>Furthermore, it is incredibly short sighted tp pigeonhole classes based on their archetype. Is an assassin a utility/buff class? Or are bards supposed to be DPS classes? Because according to BChizzle, there are only four classes/jobs in the game, and they're devided up into "flavors"...</blockquote>Actually the opposite is true, the ignorant people on this forum want monks pigeonholed into a DPS class plain and simple. I want the versitility of being able to tank effectively. See tanks can tank and dps fine, you would take away monks ability to tank to make them a DPS class which is the actual pigeonholing.You guys are once again going with this whole exaggeration thing again, taking it to the point in your arguments that monks can't DPS. It is quite the opposite we dps fine, our dps is comparable to other classes, where we fall behind other tanks is our survivability plain and simple.

bluefish

05-01-2009, 11:50 PM

<cite>Rythalian@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Way to grasp at straws to make an argument. Fighters are the tanks of EQ2 PERIOD your twisting things in your fantasy world isn't going to change that. Fighter = Tank we aren't a dps class and grats to Couching trying with the tier stuff that absolutely doesn't apply to EQ2 anymore, in that case they can leave our dps where it is and nerf all the classes massively around us.</blockquote>You're the one in the fantasy world if you think that brawlers are ever going to be on an even playing field with plate tanks in competing for tank roles.</blockquote>Sorry bud but you ARE twisting things around to try to win an argumentFighter = tank .. like it or not .. and He never said they were equal to anything .. he just said fighter = tank and he is correct.Oh and one more thing .. the only thing wrong with the monk class, are the crybabies that do nothing but moan and complain on these boards .. You know exactly who you are

Couching

05-02-2009, 12:05 AM

Class role is one thing and to be useful in raid is another.I still think that to make monk popular in raid is to make monk single target dps tank, best single target dps fighter and same survivability as aoe plate fighters.With same survivability as aoe plate tanks, we can tank any mob in this game without a problem. We don't need high end gear to be efficient in tanking raid content. In this way, we can keep our class role, dps fighter and we are useful in raid.Moreover, a lot of people were misled by Bchizzle that you only need 2 tanks in raids. It is incorrect. Actually there isn't a standard answer of how many fighters you need in raid to beat the raid content.For example, how many healers do you need to beat tythus or gynok? I have killed tythus with 5 healers and 6 healers for gynok. Is it the standard answer for every guild? Of course not.

Aull

05-02-2009, 12:24 AM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Aull wrote:</cite><blockquote>Ok this is where I get confused. Years ago both brawler's dps was higher than the plate tanks in solo, group, or raid scenes. I would venture to say that most monks and bruisers witnessed this and that is where most are basing their vision of the brawler class. Just look at brawler aa's when they came out. They actually had a de-threat included because brawlers at one time with just dps could pull aggro off the plates. Hence brawlers had at one time better dps potential.Brawlers then could tank but only the good geared and skilled ones did it effectively. This is where brawlers are having issues with the class. While we could tank at times our dps was our strong point. Back in the day when a dps class was not available a brawler could fill that spot with relative ease.While rogues are generally used for debuffs, utility, and dps they too can tank even though they do not possess all the taunts that fighters get. If we want to talk hybrids then rogues fit that description well.</blockquote>Back then plates also had more avoidance then us too and we weren't able to buff up to chain levels of mitigation. Are you suggesting they also completely change our EPIC and all our avoidance stuff as well? Like I said you can't have both and if you make brawlers a DPS class they need to be pure DPS you can't have everything and call it balanced or else why not just make dev fist pop EPICS for 100% dmg and then we could just go out and solo raid zones.</blockquote>I am not asking for the best of both worlds, but as of now we do not accel at either. As it stands currently plates still can equal and beat brawlers in avoidance, keep their mit, and equally parse and beat brawlers on dps charts and this is considered ok? If anything they have the best of both worlds and we as brawlers do not.I don't think any monk or bruiser is asking for predator dps here. Just a separation or distinguishing trait that gives them some identity.

BChizzle

05-02-2009, 12:26 AM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Class role is one thing and to be useful in raid is another.I still think that to make monk popular in raid is to make monk single target dps tank, best single target dps fighter and same survivability as aoe plate fighters.With same survivability as aoe plate tanks, we can tank any mob in this game without a problem. We don't need high end gear to be efficient in tanking raid content. In this way, we can keep our class role, dps fighter and we are useful in raid.Moreover, a lot of people were misled by Bchizzle that you only need 2 tanks in raids. It is incorrect. Actually there isn't a standard answer of how many fighters you need in raid to beat the raid content.For example, how many healers do you need to beat tythus or gynok? I have killed tythus with 5 healers and 6 healers for gynok. Is it the standard answer for every guild? Of course not.</blockquote>Once again I suggest you look up the meaning of the word 'need'. Nobody EVER said you can't have even all 6 fighters in a raid and kill stuff, as a matter of fact I pointed out it is absolutely possible just not desirable as the spots are better used with something besides a fighter. All you do is reach to make an argument, I mean seriously, what does the amount of healers you need on Tythus and Gynok have to do with anything here?I am pretty postive the only one misleading here is you since you are bringing up things completely irrelevant to the discussion.

BChizzle

05-02-2009, 12:29 AM

<cite>Aull wrote:</cite><blockquote>I am not asking for the best of both worlds, but as of now we do not accel at either. As it stands currently plates still can equal and beat brawlers in avoidance, keep their mit, and equally parse and beat brawlers on dps charts and this is considered ok? If anything they have the best of both worlds and we as brawlers do not.I don't think any monk or bruiser is asking for predator dps here. Just a separation or distinguishing trait that gives them some identity.</blockquote>I suggest then that you get your guild to throw you into the MT group and let you MT Palace trash, let me know how your parse goes if you feel inferior dps wise to other tanks, I think you will be pleasantly suprised at the outcome, however, your healers will be like '[Removed for Content] never again'.

Couching

05-02-2009, 01:12 AM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Class role is one thing and to be useful in raid is another.I still think that to make monk popular in raid is to make monk single target dps tank, best single target dps fighter and same survivability as aoe plate fighters.With same survivability as aoe plate tanks, we can tank any mob in this game without a problem. We don't need high end gear to be efficient in tanking raid content. In this way, we can keep our class role, dps fighter and we are useful in raid.Moreover, a lot of people were misled by Bchizzle that you only need 2 tanks in raids. It is incorrect. Actually there isn't a standard answer of how many fighters you need in raid to beat the raid content.For example, how many healers do you need to beat tythus or gynok? I have killed tythus with 5 healers and 6 healers for gynok. Is it the standard answer for every guild? Of course not.</blockquote>Once again I suggest you look up the meaning of the word 'need'. Nobody EVER said you can't have even all 6 fighters in a raid and kill stuff, as a matter of fact I pointed out it is absolutely possible just not desirable as the spots are better used with something besides a fighter. All you do is reach to make an argument, I mean seriously, what does the amount of healers you need on Tythus and Gynok have to do with anything here?I am pretty postive the only one misleading here is you since you are bringing up things completely irrelevant to the discussion.</blockquote>See, why is other class better than 3rd fighter in raid?When you say something in the way of " you just need two fighters in raids bleh bleh", you are telling people that having more than 2 fighters is not efficient.This is totally incorrect. It is just as dumb as if someone said you just need certain healers for certain encounter.Every guild is differet. They have different raid setup, different gear, different players, different server connection stability, etc.No, there isn't a standard answer of how many healers or fighters you need in raid for each guild. Any extra healer or fighter can be a better setup for some guilds and help them beat the encounters.

Morgane

05-02-2009, 01:17 AM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Actually the opposite is true, the ignorant people on this forum want monks pigeonholed into a DPS class plain and simple. I want the versitility of being able to tank effectively. See tanks can tank and dps fine, you would take away monks ability to tank to make them a DPS class which is the actual pigeonholing.You guys are once again going with this whole exaggeration thing again, taking it to the point in your arguments that monks can't DPS. It is quite the opposite we dps fine, our dps is comparable to other classes, where we fall behind other tanks is our survivability plain and simple.</blockquote>The ignorance on this forum isn't coming from us, bud. You are either having difficulty reading or you are having difficulty comprehending. The only one trying to pigeon hole us into ANY role is you and the few (er, one or two) others who agree with you. The rest of us mostly agree that the Monk is a hybrid class who could once out-DPS plate tanks at the expense of less survivability. And while you rail against pigeon-holing us into a DPS role, your argument on the other hand would pigeonhole us into a tank role. Either way, we get pigeon-holed.In which case, this is all simply a matter of opinion which depends on which role you prefer to be stuck with. Me, I would prefer the keep the monk as it's been since I rolled the class a couple years ago... a hybrid class who can do both well. Heck, there is even a poll over at "that other" forum which asks which role we should be in. "Hybrid" class is winning hands down, with DPS in second. Hardly a scientific poll but certainly indicative of the direction most Monks wish we were heading in. Then again, maybe we're all aruging for naught because I haven't seen SoE do anything to the Monk except nerf us.

BChizzle

05-02-2009, 01:29 AM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>See, why is other class better than 3rd fighter in raid?When you say something in the way of " you just need two fighters in raids bleh bleh", you are telling people that having more than 2 fighters is not efficient.This is totally incorrect. It is just as dumb as if someone said you just need certain healers for certain encounter.Every guild is differet. They have different raid setup, different gear, different players, different server connection stability, etc.No, there isn't a standard answer of how many healers or fighters you need in raid for each guild. Any extra healer or fighter can be a better setup for some guilds and help them beat the encounters.</blockquote>Because you can just put a brigand in there have dispatch up 100% of the time, or put a enchanter in there get better buffs, or hey stack bards etc etc etc all are better then having a monk that only brings sub standard dps to the table. So unless you make us more dps then a pred, more debuff then a rogue, more buffers then bards why the hell wouldn't you just use one of those in that spot?

Couching

05-02-2009, 01:43 AM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>See, why is other class better than 3rd fighter in raid?When you say something in the way of " you just need two fighters in raids bleh bleh", you are telling people that having more than 2 fighters is not efficient.This is totally incorrect. It is just as dumb as if someone said you just need certain healers for certain encounter.Every guild is differet. They have different raid setup, different gear, different players, different server connection stability, etc.No, there isn't a standard answer of how many healers or fighters you need in raid for each guild. Any extra healer or fighter can be a better setup for some guilds and help them beat the encounters.</blockquote>Because you can just put a brigand in there have dispatch up 100% of the time, or put a enchanter in there get better buffs, or hey stack bards etc etc etc all are better then having a monk that only brings sub standard dps to the table. So unless you make us more dps then a pred, more debuff then a rogue, more buffers then bards why the hell wouldn't you just use one of those in that spot?</blockquote>No, because a lot of wipes were caused by tank got owned or tank can't hold aggro rather than not enough dps or debuff.For examples, Some guilds have two tanks on gynok adds instead of one or two tanks on gynok instead of one. Some guilds have two tanks on penta adds instead of one tank. Some guilds have two tanks on blob add in ykesha instead of one. Some guilds have two tanks on tyrannus instead of one. There are just too many examples and I am too lazy to count it.The fact is, guilds raiding 7 days a week are minority in eq2. Most guilds only raid 3-4 days and they get gear very slow. Having extra fighter in the raid makes most encounters a lot easier for them.

BChizzle

05-02-2009, 02:03 AM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>See, why is other class better than 3rd fighter in raid?When you say something in the way of " you just need two fighters in raids bleh bleh", you are telling people that having more than 2 fighters is not efficient.This is totally incorrect. It is just as dumb as if someone said you just need certain healers for certain encounter.Every guild is differet. They have different raid setup, different gear, different players, different server connection stability, etc.No, there isn't a standard answer of how many healers or fighters you need in raid for each guild. Any extra healer or fighter can be a better setup for some guilds and help them beat the encounters.</blockquote>Because you can just put a brigand in there have dispatch up 100% of the time, or put a enchanter in there get better buffs, or hey stack bards etc etc etc all are better then having a monk that only brings sub standard dps to the table. So unless you make us more dps then a pred, more debuff then a rogue, more buffers then bards why the hell wouldn't you just use one of those in that spot?</blockquote>No, because a lot of wipes were caused by tank got owned or tank can't hold aggro rather than not enough dps or debuff.For examples, Some guilds have two tanks on gynok adds instead of one or two tanks on gynok instead of one. Some guilds have two tanks on penta adds instead of one tank. Some guilds have two tanks on blob add in ykesha instead of one. Some guilds have two tanks on tyrannus instead of one. There are just too many examples and I am too lazy to count it.The fact is, guilds raiding 7 days a week are minority in eq2. Most guilds only raid 3-4 days and they get gear very slow. Having extra fighter in the raid makes most encounters a lot easier for them.</blockquote>Then once again why the hell would that extra fighter be a monk, for the roles you just pointed out it would be a hell of alot easier to bring a plate tank in that spot plain and simple.

BChizzle

05-02-2009, 02:11 AM

I mean seriously, Gynok for example, you have a 2nd guard in there and they can just recapture and ToS every curse, plus if one goes down at least the other lives longer then a monk. I am sorry but you cannot say that having a monk being the 2nd tank on Gynok is easier then just having a 2nd guard. Penta adds? Are you kidding me you are better to have an ae tank class which is not a monk on the penta adds, tho this strat is pretty limited seeing as the adds would probably die before penta if the two tanks banging on them were even remotely decent. And the argument of not raiding 7 days a week is complete BS, since the lower on progression you are the more need for tanks that can actually tank are there for wipes and whatever. The truth is even if you are raiding 3-4 nights a week, eventually you will be geared and won't require that extra tank that can't tank.

Couching

05-02-2009, 03:04 AM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>I mean seriously, Gynok for example, you have a 2nd guard in there and they can just recapture and ToS every curse, plus if one goes down at least the other lives longer then a monk. I am sorry but you cannot say that having a monk being the 2nd tank on Gynok is easier then just having a 2nd guard. Penta adds? Are you kidding me you are better to have an ae tank class which is not a monk on the penta adds, tho this strat is pretty limited seeing as the adds would probably die before penta if the two tanks banging on them were even remotely decent. And the argument of not raiding 7 days a week is complete BS, since the lower on progression you are the more need for tanks that can actually tank are there for wipes and whatever. The truth is even if you are raiding 3-4 nights a week, eventually you will be geared and won't require that extra tank that can't tank.</blockquote>That's why I said monk needs same survivability as aoe plate tanks and best single target dps of fighters to compete with other fighters for 3rd tank spot in raid.For gynok, you are wrong. guardian has TOS and we have tsnuami. I have MT gynok without dying many times.For penta adds, you are wrong. Two tanks can defintely get aggro back faster than 1 single aoe tank especially if you have 3 adds up rather than 2. It's up to different strategy, some guilds killed 1 add and some guild killed 2 adds.Also, it's not just what fighters you want in the guild. How to gear them up is the biggest problem. Having two guardians? Very dumb in this xpac unless you are really lucky to get tons of guardian patterns.You conclusion means nothing. It applied to healers as well. Most guilds have 7-8 healers in raids in the begining. With progression, you need less and less healers for encounters in farming status.

BChizzle

05-02-2009, 03:33 AM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>That's why I said monk needs same survivability as aoe plate tanks and best single target dps of fighters to compete with other fighters for 3rd tank spot in raid.For gynok, you are wrong. guardian has TOS and we have tsnuami. I have MT gynok without dying many times.For penta adds, you are wrong. Two tanks can defintely get aggro back faster than 1 single aoe tank especially if you have 3 adds up rather than 2. It's up to different strategy, some guilds killed 1 add and some guild killed 2 adds.Also, it's not just what fighters you want in the guild. How to gear them up is the biggest problem. Having two guardians? Very dumb in this xpac unless you are really lucky to get tons of guardian patterns.You conclusion means nothing. It applied to healers as well. Most guilds have 7-8 healers in raids in the begining. With progression, you need less and less healers for encounters in farming status.</blockquote>LOL don't tell me I am wrong when you really don't have a clue what you are talking about, tower of stone is completely and utterly superior to Tsunami for counteracting the curse and 2 guards makes Gynok easymode since you can have it up every single curse. Gearing 2 guards? Are you serious a guard can tank Gynok with 2-3 set items that drop from easy mobs. On top of that it is completely and utterly stupid to compare ae tanks survivability to single target tanks, single target tanks including monks should have higher survivability because ae adds don't hit as hard as mobs you single target tank. I mean seriously you will reach and exaggerrate everything and anything to make a point, what does how many healers are in a raid have to do with anything regarding monk tanking and dps.It doesn't matter anyways, you still haven't provided a role for monks with your suggestions, as I said any other tank class can do exactly the role you are talking about only better and dps isn't going to fix that.

Couching

05-02-2009, 03:42 AM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>That's why I said monk needs same survivability as aoe plate tanks and best single target dps of fighters to compete with other fighters for 3rd tank spot in raid.For gynok, you are wrong. guardian has TOS and we have tsnuami. I have MT gynok without dying many times.For penta adds, you are wrong. Two tanks can defintely get aggro back faster than 1 single aoe tank especially if you have 3 adds up rather than 2. It's up to different strategy, some guilds killed 1 add and some guild killed 2 adds.Also, it's not just what fighters you want in the guild. How to gear them up is the biggest problem. Having two guardians? Very dumb in this xpac unless you are really lucky to get tons of guardian patterns.You conclusion means nothing. It applied to healers as well. Most guilds have 7-8 healers in raids in the begining. With progression, you need less and less healers for encounters in farming status.</blockquote>LOL don't tell me I am wrong when you really don't have a clue what you are talking about, tower of stone is completely and utterly superior to Tsunami for counteracting the curse and 2 guards makes Gynok easymode since you can have it up every single curse. Gearing 2 guards? Are you serious a guard can tank Gynok with 2-3 set items that drop from easy mobs. On top of that it is completely and utterly stupid to compare ae tanks survivability to single target tanks, single target tanks including monks should have higher survivability because ae adds don't hit as hard as mobs you single target tank. I mean seriously you will reach and exaggerrate everything and anything to make a point, what does how many healers are in a raid have to do with anything regarding monk tanking and dps.It doesn't matter anyways, you still haven't provided a role for monks with your suggestions, as I said any other tank class can do exactly the role you are talking about only better and dps isn't going to fix that.</blockquote>Lol, gynok is an easy mob? Fine, that's why your guild can't kill it till 1/22 and you raid 7 days a week. Oh, and my guild killed it in 1/12 without 2 guardians on gynok. thx bye.The fact is, I already provided a role for monks and it's better than what you did, a guardian clone. Go play a guardian and don't whining here plz.

BChizzle

05-02-2009, 04:12 AM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Lol, gynok is an easy mob? Fine, that's why your guild can't kill it till 1/22 and you raid 7 days a week. Oh, and my guild killed it in 1/12 without 2 guardians on gynok. thx bye.The fact is, I already provided a role for monks and it's better than what you did, a guardian clone. Go play a guardian and don't whining here plz.</blockquote>LOL? So now back to comparing guilds again? Are you serious? What does that have to do with the topic at hand other then the fact my guild is completely superior to yours? Nice try on the attempt yet again to divert the topic away from your idea completely sucking.So since we are comparing guilds, when did yours kill Justice? No wait how about Flame or Fear? Thats right you haven't. Please keep trying with the comparison. You don't stack up.

Morrolan V

05-02-2009, 05:39 AM

<cite>Akao@Butcherblock wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rythalian@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Way to grasp at straws to make an argument. Fighters are the tanks of EQ2 PERIOD your twisting things in your fantasy world isn't going to change that. Fighter = Tank we aren't a dps class and grats to Couching trying with the tier stuff that absolutely doesn't apply to EQ2 anymore, in that case they can leave our dps where it is and nerf all the classes massively around us.</blockquote>You're the one in the fantasy world if you think that brawlers are ever going to be on an even playing field with plate tanks in competing for tank roles.</blockquote>Sorry bud but you ARE twisting things around to try to win an argumentFighter = tank .. like it or not .. and He never said they were equal to anything .. he just said fighter = tank and he is correct.Oh and one more thing .. the only thing wrong with the monk class, are the crybabies that do nothing but moan and complain on these boards .. You know exactly who you are</blockquote>You know, I see this and I really, truly wonder what game people have been playing for the past four years. Because either they have been playing a different game than I have or they are completely delusional.I am twisting nothing. SoE has given fighters a whole range of abilities that have nothing whatsoever to do with tanking. In fact, they have given them abilities that ONLY WORK WHEN WE ARE NOT TANKING. Where is the mystery? You are wrong. There are more roles for fighters than merely tanking.

Couching

05-02-2009, 08:48 AM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Lol, gynok is an easy mob? Fine, that's why your guild can't kill it till 1/22 and you raid 7 days a week. Oh, and my guild killed it in 1/12 without 2 guardians on gynok. thx bye.The fact is, I already provided a role for monks and it's better than what you did, a guardian clone. Go play a guardian and don't whining here plz.</blockquote>LOL? So now back to comparing guilds again? Are you serious? What does that have to do with the topic at hand other then the fact my guild is completely superior to yours? Nice try on the attempt yet again to divert the topic away from your idea completely sucking.So since we are comparing guilds, when did yours kill Justice? No wait how about Flame or Fear? Thats right you haven't. Please keep trying with the comparison. You don't stack up.</blockquote>No, it's not comparing guilds.It's the fact that your so called supreme hardcore guild that raids 7 days a week has to spend solid 2 months getting enough gear for their tanks to beat gynok. It implied that EITHER, it's not easy to gather enough gear OR gynok is not that easy as you described. All of your posts are full of puffing and BS.

Couching

05-02-2009, 09:07 AM

<cite>Rythalian@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Akao@Butcherblock wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rythalian@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Way to grasp at straws to make an argument. Fighters are the tanks of EQ2 PERIOD your twisting things in your fantasy world isn't going to change that. Fighter = Tank we aren't a dps class and grats to Couching trying with the tier stuff that absolutely doesn't apply to EQ2 anymore, in that case they can leave our dps where it is and nerf all the classes massively around us.</blockquote>You're the one in the fantasy world if you think that brawlers are ever going to be on an even playing field with plate tanks in competing for tank roles.</blockquote>Sorry bud but you ARE twisting things around to try to win an argumentFighter = tank .. like it or not .. and He never said they were equal to anything .. he just said fighter = tank and he is correct.Oh and one more thing .. the only thing wrong with the monk class, are the crybabies that do nothing but moan and complain on these boards .. You know exactly who you are</blockquote>You know, I see this and I really, truly wonder what game people have been playing for the past four years. Because either they have been playing a different game than I have or they are completely delusional.I am twisting nothing. SoE has given fighters a whole range of abilities that have nothing whatsoever to do with tanking. In fact, they have given them abilities that ONLY WORK WHEN WE ARE NOT TANKING. Where is the mystery? You are wrong. There are more roles for fighters than merely tanking.</blockquote>Even I want monk to be a better tank, I have to agree with Rythalian because he is right; tanking wasn't the only role we had in this game for the past four years.Brawlers are the only fighters that got deaggro. There is no reason to get deaggro if tanking is our only role.The fact is that brawlers were dps fighters in this game. We always had significant better dps than plate tanks and the trade off was our worse survivability.The problem is that plate tanks kept whining that they don't have enough dps to SOLO or to hold aggro. The result is their constant dps boost in every xpac.For example, guardian and pal auto attack modifier was the same as bard in the game launch. now, all fighters have the same auto attack modifier.Even though, you can still find posts from guardians that they want more dps. LOL

BChizzle

05-02-2009, 05:08 PM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Even I want monk to be a better tank, I have to agree with Rythalian because he is right; tanking wasn't the only role we had in this game for the past four years.Brawlers are the only fighters that got deaggro. There is no reason to get deaggro if tanking is our only role.The fact is that brawlers were dps fighters in this game. We always had significant better dps than plate tanks and the trade off was our worse survivability.The problem is that plate tanks kept whining that they don't have enough dps to SOLO or to hold aggro. The result is their constant dps boost in every xpac.For example, guardian and pal auto attack modifier was the same as bard in the game launch. now, all fighters have the same auto attack modifier.Even though, you can still find posts from guardians that they want more dps. LOL</blockquote>Using EOF AA's as a basis for your argument is pretty dumb and you are reaching again. Our EOF tree is one of the worst, you don't have a leg to stand on really, not to mention the deagro aa was completely useless for the most part and was more for grouping not raiding as a raid tank wouldn't ever have to worry about losing agro to a monk even if the monk had on dragon stance.

Sirhk

05-03-2009, 06:02 AM

<cite>Morgane@Everfrost wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Sirhk wrote:</cite><blockquote>What we need is exactly what Bchizzle said, more tanking skills. Maybe a slight downward tweak on other fighters dps but not a major increase to ours.</blockquote>But... how is that going to make us more desirable in raids? It sounds as if you are calling for a nerf to the other fighter classes so that we can be equal or better at DPS (which we should be since we are the DPS FIGHTER CLASS). And even if the devs decide to nerf the other fighter classes to accommodate Monks (highly unlikely) then exactly how is that going to "fix" us? And for that matter, how are more tanking skills going to help? I can gurantee you that plate tanks will still get the preference. The game is way too old now to shift an entire player base's thinking about that. Plate tanks have more survivability (except for the 1% of uber Monks like BChizzle) and will get picked over Monks 90% of the time.</blockquote>You quoted one line of a paragraph. I listed a few ideas after that.Seriously, most of the people griping here are tanking raid mobs anyway. Yeah we are imbalanced but only in tanking, its harder for us. If its gonna be harder then yes we should have more dps than plate tanks....but not rogue dps. And to be quite honest alot of that comes from set bonuses. Fix itemization and you make 3 giant steps forward to fixing brawlers imo.I agree we need help, but in answer to the OP.....Monks get no help because we whine too much and can't even agree what to whine about.

BChizzle

05-03-2009, 06:18 AM

<cite>Sirhk wrote:</cite><blockquote>You quoted one line of a paragraph. I listed a few ideas after that.Seriously, most of the people griping here are tanking raid mobs anyway. Yeah we are imbalanced but only in tanking, its harder for us. If its gonna be harder then yes we should have more dps than plate tanks....but not rogue dps. And to be quite honest alot of that comes from set bonuses. Fix itemization and you make 3 giant steps forward to fixing brawlers imo.I agree we need help, but in answer to the OP.....Monks get no help because we whine too much and can't even agree what to whine about.</blockquote>I did almost 12k on Gynok last night, we don't need more dps.

Sirhk

05-03-2009, 06:40 AM

Couching

05-03-2009, 10:09 AM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Sirhk wrote:</cite><blockquote>You quoted one line of a paragraph. I listed a few ideas after that.Seriously, most of the people griping here are tanking raid mobs anyway. Yeah we are imbalanced but only in tanking, its harder for us. If its gonna be harder then yes we should have more dps than plate tanks....but not rogue dps. And to be quite honest alot of that comes from set bonuses. Fix itemization and you make 3 giant steps forward to fixing brawlers imo.I agree we need help, but in answer to the OP.....Monks get no help because we whine too much and can't even agree what to whine about.</blockquote>I did almost 12k on Gynok last night, we don't need more dps.</blockquote>Not impressive at all.Any fighter can deal but higher dps with your gear/raidsetup and tanking at same time.The fact is 12k is really low for gynok encounter with your hit rate; 95%+ hit rate.Most aoe tanks with inferior gear can deal 15k+ dps and they are tanking so that they have much lower hit rate; 60%-70% on add and even lower if main tanking gynok.For example, <a href="http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/4422/gynok1.jpg," target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/4422/gynok1.jpg,</a> 17k dps with only 60% hit rate whiling tanking adds.Or 21k dps for another sk whiling tanking adds.Your number just proved that monk dps needs an upgrade.

Couching

05-03-2009, 10:11 AM

<cite>Sirhk wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Sirhk wrote:</cite><blockquote>You quoted one line of a paragraph. I listed a few ideas after that.Seriously, most of the people griping here are tanking raid mobs anyway. Yeah we are imbalanced but only in tanking, its harder for us. If its gonna be harder then yes we should have more dps than plate tanks....but not rogue dps. And to be quite honest alot of that comes from set bonuses. Fix itemization and you make 3 giant steps forward to fixing brawlers imo.I agree we need help, but in answer to the OP.....Monks get no help because we whine too much and can't even agree what to whine about.</blockquote>I did almost 12k on Gynok last night, we don't need more dps.</blockquote>I agree. What I said was 'IF its gonna be harder for us to tank then yes we should have slightly more dps than plate tanks.' Not rogue dps though. </blockquote>We won't get rogue dps nor guardian survivability. Someone just can't understand it.

BChizzle

05-03-2009, 03:03 PM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Sirhk wrote:</cite><blockquote>You quoted one line of a paragraph. I listed a few ideas after that.Seriously, most of the people griping here are tanking raid mobs anyway. Yeah we are imbalanced but only in tanking, its harder for us. If its gonna be harder then yes we should have more dps than plate tanks....but not rogue dps. And to be quite honest alot of that comes from set bonuses. Fix itemization and you make 3 giant steps forward to fixing brawlers imo.I agree we need help, but in answer to the OP.....Monks get no help because we whine too much and can't even agree what to whine about.</blockquote>I did almost 12k on Gynok last night, we don't need more dps.</blockquote>Not impressive at all.Any fighter can deal but higher dps with your gear/raidsetup and tanking at same time.The fact is 12k is really low for gynok encounter with your hit rate; 95%+ hit rate.Most aoe tanks with inferior gear can deal 15k+ dps and they are tanking so that they have much lower hit rate; 60%-70% on add and even lower if main tanking gynok.For example, <a rel="nofollow" href="http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/4422/gynok1.jpg," target="_blank">http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/4422/gynok1.jpg,</a> 17k dps with only 60% hit rate whiling tanking adds.Or 21k dps for another sk whiling tanking adds.Your number just proved that monk dps needs an upgrade.</blockquote>I don't see you doing 12k or even close. It was without a brig too. The sk parse was with broken procs LOL way to make an argument.

Derang

05-03-2009, 03:23 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Sirhk wrote:</cite><blockquote>You quoted one line of a paragraph. I listed a few ideas after that.Seriously, most of the people griping here are tanking raid mobs anyway. Yeah we are imbalanced but only in tanking, its harder for us. If its gonna be harder then yes we should have more dps than plate tanks....but not rogue dps. And to be quite honest alot of that comes from set bonuses. Fix itemization and you make 3 giant steps forward to fixing brawlers imo.I agree we need help, but in answer to the OP.....Monks get no help because we whine too much and can't even agree what to whine about.</blockquote>I did almost 12k on Gynok last night, we don't need more dps.</blockquote>I wonder why...maybe because your 1 out of 8 Monks who kill Avatars and all the high end content? GET IT IN YOUR HEAD, not everyone is in the same position as you!!! Quit being an idiot for one post, actually if you dont mind take your self over to flames and rant how cool you there are cause you parse high, WITH GEAR! Man your pathetic go ruin someone elses thread, getting annoyed reading how your always "right" when everyone is throwing their opinion out there...You have to instant flame it! omg! Hey word of advice, seems you need some Chiz, role a plate tank I heard they survive better on ae fights.

Couching

05-03-2009, 03:40 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Sirhk wrote:</cite><blockquote>You quoted one line of a paragraph. I listed a few ideas after that.Seriously, most of the people griping here are tanking raid mobs anyway. Yeah we are imbalanced but only in tanking, its harder for us. If its gonna be harder then yes we should have more dps than plate tanks....but not rogue dps. And to be quite honest alot of that comes from set bonuses. Fix itemization and you make 3 giant steps forward to fixing brawlers imo.I agree we need help, but in answer to the OP.....Monks get no help because we whine too much and can't even agree what to whine about.</blockquote>I did almost 12k on Gynok last night, we don't need more dps.</blockquote>Not impressive at all.Any fighter can deal but higher dps with your gear/raidsetup and tanking at same time.The fact is 12k is really low for gynok encounter with your hit rate; 95%+ hit rate.Most aoe tanks with inferior gear can deal 15k+ dps and they are tanking so that they have much lower hit rate; 60%-70% on add and even lower if main tanking gynok.For example, <a rel="nofollow" href="http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/4422/gynok1.jpg," target="_blank">http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/4422/gynok1.jpg,</a> 17k dps with only 60% hit rate whiling tanking adds.Or 21k dps for another sk whiling tanking adds.Your number just proved that monk dps needs an upgrade.</blockquote>I don't see you doing 12k or even close. It was without a brig too. The sk parse was with broken procs LOL way to make an argument.</blockquote>Becasue my job is tanking gynok with tank gear. You are in offensive gear and didn't tank or just tank 10 sec to rez MT. Though, it's not the point. The point is monk dps is way behind plate tanks.The fact is, any guardian with similar gear/ group setup can deal 12k too and they have better survivability.Not to say, any other aoe plate tanks can deal more than 12k and tanking at same time with better survivability.When you are in offensieve stance and dps gear, your dps is not better than plate tanks while tanking. This is the serious problem. No, our dps is not fine.

circusgirl

05-03-2009, 04:05 PM

First off, lets be honest--I think we can all agree that the class is broken right now and needs fixing. The real question is how to fix us, and there's basically a couple models being kicked around. Option 1: Give us survivability as good or almost as good as plate tanks, and let the competition for tanking slots be won by player skill instead of which class you are. This would involve our DPS being no better than other plate tanks, which means minor nerfs at most since we're not much higher than them now.Option 2: Up brawler dps to significantly higher than plate tanks, leave our survivability significantly inferior to them, and have us serve as "snap tanks" viable for things like Zarrakon's adds or tanking for about as long as it takes to get the MT back up. Would probably mean slight nerfs to our survivabilityOption 3: The Hybrid model--Let us choose whether to be tanks or dps based on gear, AA, and stance choices, but make the two roles distinct (i.e., in one spec we can either have high survivability OR high dps, but can't do high dps while tanking). This would have us by necessity as not the absolute best in either role, but viable in both.Option 4: Utility. Completely revamp the class to make us the fighter equivalent of a bard or enchanter. Probably the best way to guarantee a raid slot, but by far the most unlikely since it means completely changing the class concept.Now, I'm honestly willing to take any solution that fixes the class and gives us a useful role in a raid. Personally I prefer option 3--I'd like to be a solid tank when I need to tank, and to put on my dps spec/gear/stance when another fighter isn't needed instead of sitting out for another scout. It has the benefit of flexibility and only gearing up one character instead of two, and with a weeee bit more utility could be extremely viable. I'd suggest a handful of changes to accomplish this:<ul><li>Up meditative healing to 40% (as was planned in the fighter revamp)</li><li>Remove the TSO Heal AA and add in a solid dps option</li><li>Move abilities around in the EoF AA lines to seperate tanking and dpsing abilities, forcing a brawler to choose which line they want to go down. </li></ul>Switch eagles fury (melee crit) with claw reversal (+deflection chance) to make the str line dps and the int line tanking based, and up the MC and DA to be equal to that obtained by plate tanks for equal AAs Make Eagle Shriek (int endline) a pure tanking abilityChange Crane Twirl to 40% AE autoattackCompletely redo the sta line into an aggro control line. This gives us str: dps (single-target), agi: reuse speed/utility, sta:tanking (aggro), wis: dps (AE), and str: tanking (survivability)<ul><li>Revamp the KoS endline AAs to have two solid tanking options and two solid dps options, but arrange the lines in such a way that it is difficult to get both.</li><li>De-nerf the monk raidwide</li><li>Give us a solid and unique utility role: Make all avoidance count as uncontested for tranquil vision (so it can be used in offensive stance effectively), or, alternatively, make it affect all fighters in a raid.</li><li>Get rid of strikethrough on raid mobs</li><li>Get rid of the aggro-lock immunities so that peel will work properly</li></ul><div>This requires a lot of work...but I think would basically fix the class completely if these things were implemented. </div>

BChizzle

05-03-2009, 04:06 PM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Becasue my job is tanking gynok with tank gear. You are in offensive gear and didn't tank or just tank 10 sec to rez MT. Though, it's not the point. The point is monk dps is way behind plate tanks.The fact is, any guardian with similar gear/ group setup can deal 12k too and they have better survivability.Not to say, any other aoe plate tanks can deal more than 12k and tanking at same time with better survivability.When you are in offensieve stance and dps gear, your dps is not better than plate tanks while tanking. This is the serious problem. No, our dps is not fine.</blockquote>LAWL? Sorry but if the tank happens to go down I can pick up gynok and tank him for as long as needed in offensive stance with my 'DPS' gear. Our plate tanks DW on that fight as well, you seriously have no clue [Removed for Content] you are talking about.

BChizzle

05-03-2009, 04:11 PM

<cite>Vinka@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>First off, lets be honest--I think we can all agree that the class is broken right now and needs fixing. The real question is how to fix us, and there's basically a couple models being kicked around. Option 1: Give us survivability as good or almost as good as plate tanks, and let the competition for tanking slots be won by player skill instead of which class you are. This would involve our DPS being no better than other plate tanks, which means minor nerfs at most since we're not much higher than them now.Option 2: Up brawler dps to significantly higher than plate tanks, leave our survivability significantly inferior to them, and have us serve as "snap tanks" viable for things like Zarrakon's adds or tanking for about as long as it takes to get the MT back up. Would probably mean slight nerfs to our survivabilityOption 3: The Hybrid model--Let us choose whether to be tanks or dps based on gear, AA, and stance choices, but make the two roles distinct (i.e., in one spec we can either have high survivability OR high dps, but can't do high dps while tanking). This would have us by necessity as not the absolute best in either role, but viable in both.Option 4: Utility. Completely revamp the class to make us the fighter equivalent of a bard or enchanter. Probably the best way to guarantee a raid slot, but by far the most unlikely since it means completely changing the class concept.Now, I'm honestly willing to take any solution that fixes the class and gives us a useful role in a raid. Personally I prefer option 3--I'd like to be a solid tank when I need to tank, and to put on my dps spec/gear/stance when another fighter isn't needed instead of sitting out for another scout. It has the benefit of flexibility and only gearing up one character instead of two, and with a weeee bit more utility could be extremely viable. I'd suggest a handful of changes to accomplish this:<ul><li>Up meditative healing to 40% (as was planned in the fighter revamp)</li><li>Remove the TSO Heal AA and add in a solid dps option</li><li>Move abilities around in the EoF AA lines to seperate tanking and dpsing abilities, forcing a brawler to choose which line they want to go down. </li><li> Switch eagles fury (melee crit) with claw reversal (+deflection chance) to make the str line dps and the int line tanking bassed, and up the MC and DA to be equal to that obtained by plate tanks for equal AAs </li><li> Make Eagle Shriek (int endline) a pure tanking ability</li><li> Change Crane Twirl to 40% AE autoattack</li><li>Revamp the KoS endline AAs to have two solid tanking options and two solid dps options, but arrange the lines in such a way that it is difficult to get both.</li><li>De-nerf the monk raidwide</li><li>Give us a solid and unique utility role: Make all avoidance count as uncontested for tranquil vision, or, alternatively, make it affect all fighters in a raid.</li><li>Get rid of strikethrough on raid mobs</li><li>Get rid of the aggro-lock immunities so that peel will work properly</li></ul><div>This requires a lot of work...but I think would basically fix the class completely if these things were implemented. </div></blockquote>Some nice suggestions however, the TSO heal AA is awesome, switching str and int KOS is silly.

Couching

05-03-2009, 04:16 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Becasue my job is tanking gynok with tank gear. You are in offensive gear and didn't tank or just tank 10 sec to rez MT. Though, it's not the point. The point is monk dps is way behind plate tanks.The fact is, any guardian with similar gear/ group setup can deal 12k too and they have better survivability.Not to say, any other aoe plate tanks can deal more than 12k and tanking at same time with better survivability.When you are in offensieve stance and dps gear, your dps is not better than plate tanks while tanking. This is the serious problem. No, our dps is not fine.</blockquote>LAWL? Sorry but if the tank happens to go down I can pick up gynok and tank him for as long as needed in offensive stance with my 'DPS' gear. Our plate tanks DW on that fight as well, you seriously have no clue [Removed for Content] you are talking about.</blockquote>I already stated that you have problem in reading and comprehension. Your posts confirmed it again and again.I said you are in offensive stance with dps gear and your post just confirmed it.On the contrary, I said I am always in defensive gear and tanking in defensive stance due to different raid set up, server connection stability, etc.So who is the idiot with no clue of his post? You.

Morrolan V

05-03-2009, 04:16 PM

<cite>Deranged wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Sirhk wrote:</cite><blockquote>You quoted one line of a paragraph. I listed a few ideas after that.Seriously, most of the people griping here are tanking raid mobs anyway. Yeah we are imbalanced but only in tanking, its harder for us. If its gonna be harder then yes we should have more dps than plate tanks....but not rogue dps. And to be quite honest alot of that comes from set bonuses. Fix itemization and you make 3 giant steps forward to fixing brawlers imo.I agree we need help, but in answer to the OP.....Monks get no help because we whine too much and can't even agree what to whine about.</blockquote>I did almost 12k on Gynok last night, we don't need more dps.</blockquote>I wonder why...maybe because your 1 out of 8 Monks who kill Avatars and all the high end content? GET IT IN YOUR HEAD, not everyone is in the same position as you!!! Quit being an idiot for one post, actually if you dont mind take your self over to flames and rant how cool you there are cause you parse high, WITH GEAR! Man your pathetic go ruin someone elses thread, getting annoyed reading how your always "right" when everyone is throwing their opinion out there...You have to instant flame it! omg! Hey word of advice, seems you need some Chiz, role a plate tank I heard they survive better on ae fights.</blockquote>QFT re: Chizzle. LoL at your "I did 12K so all monks aren't broken." You need to bone up on your logic skills a little.Sirhk - I have seen this little canard around several times now. "Brawlers get no love because they can't come up with a shared vision so the devs don't know what to do." That's such BS. It's not the players' JOB to come up with a vision for the class. It's the devs' job. THEY GET PAID TO DO IT, FFS.Look, let's make it easy on the Devs. Multiple choice visions. Two criteria: (1) fighters need to be balanced among themselves, and (2) if you are going to give fighters ANY role other than tanking, you need to balance them agaisnt the DPS and utility classes they are competing against.Multiple choice answer 1: The tanking vision. Brawlers are fighters, fighters are tanks, we are not interested in balancing them for any role in groups or raids other than tanking. Result: keep dps and single target aggro where it is, buff survivability a lot, boost AoE aggro.Multiple choice answer 2: The multiple role vision. Brawlers should be good heroic tanks, short term/specific situation epic tanks and have a viable role in a well designed raid force other than tanking. In this case, our tanking is about where it needs to be, and our DPS needs to come up by ~15-20% - to be close to, but still notably behind, rogues. You also need to make our short term survival abilities better (zero cast time on tsunami), and make snap aggro work on TSO epics.There's really no reason, by the way, that you can have option 3: BOTH 1 and 2, but mutually exclusive. Make the AA trees and gear choices such that you can realize either vision, but not switch back and forth between the two roles on the fly. (And before anyone says "oh you just want it all, you greedy brawlers" - the same could be made true for any fighter class.) EDIT - too funny. Vinka and I were posting basically EXACTLY the same thing at the same time. No shared vision? I think not. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/b2eb59423fbf5fa39342041237025880.gif" border="0" />

circusgirl

05-03-2009, 04:18 PM

Actually, switching the defensive ability (deflection chance) in the str line for the offensive ability (melee crit) in the int line makes a LOT of sense. If you like the hybrid model I'm suggesting (i.e., you can tank or dps, and do either effectively, but you CAN'T do them both to full effect at the same time), then by moving all the dps stuff into one line and all the tank stuff in another line you allow monks to stack up on either dps or survivability. As it stands now, its very hard to get lots of defensive abilities from the EoF line because in order to get the +deflection chance, +deflection, +parry, +hp, or +defense you have to spend 12 points in dps abilities first. This essentially forces us into doing mediocre dps and mediocre tanking simultaneously, instead of solid tanking OR solid dps. Simply by rearranging several abilities, we give monks a chance to specialize and choose their role.

Morrolan V

05-03-2009, 04:23 PM

<cite>Vinka@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Actually, switching the defensive ability (deflection chance) in the str line for the offensive ability (melee crit) in the int line makes a LOT of sense. If you like the hybrid model I'm suggesting (i.e., you can tank or dps, and do either effectively, but you CAN'T do them both to full effect at the same time), then by moving all the dps stuff into one line and all the tank stuff in another line you allow monks to stack up on either dps or survivability. As it stands now, its very hard to get lots of defensive abilities from the EoF line because in order to get the +deflection chance, +deflection, +parry, +hp, or +defense you have to spend 12 points in dps abilities first. This essentially forces us into doing mediocre dps and mediocre tanking simultaneously, instead of solid tanking OR solid dps. Simply by rearranging several abilities, we give monks a chance to specialize and choose their role.</blockquote>QFE and well said.

BChizzle

05-03-2009, 04:56 PM

circusgirl

05-03-2009, 05:06 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Vinka@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Actually, switching the defensive ability (deflection chance) in the str line for the offensive ability (melee crit) in the int line makes a LOT of sense. If you like the hybrid model I'm suggesting (i.e., you can tank or dps, and do either effectively, but you CAN'T do them both to full effect at the same time), then by moving all the dps stuff into one line and all the tank stuff in another line you allow monks to stack up on either dps or survivability. As it stands now, its very hard to get lots of defensive abilities from the EoF line because in order to get the +deflection chance, +deflection, +parry, +hp, or +defense you have to spend 12 points in dps abilities first. This essentially forces us into doing mediocre dps and mediocre tanking simultaneously, instead of solid tanking OR solid dps. Simply by rearranging several abilities, we give monks a chance to specialize and choose their role.</blockquote>Actually the crit on the int line is pretty close to useless seeing as how we can get our crit up near to max without it. The DA however is useful. All you would be doing is causing people who need deflection chance to have to use 8 extra points to get it since they probably would already have the da bonus anyways.</blockquote>I don't think you're understanding what I'm saying. Under my model it takes LESS points to get the deflection chance, not more. The str and int lines would look like this:+int--->Eagle spin-->Deflection chance-->Parry-->Survivability special as endline+str-->Pressure Point-->Double Attack-->Melee crit-->chiSo now you get deflection chance after 8 points spent (4 in +int, 4 in eagle spin) instead of after 12 (4 in str, 4 pressure point, 4 DA). No changes to those abilities, just moving them around so you get EITHER defensive ones OR offensive ones, instead of half defense half offense

BChizzle

05-03-2009, 05:19 PM

<cite>Vinka@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Vinka@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Actually, switching the defensive ability (deflection chance) in the str line for the offensive ability (melee crit) in the int line makes a LOT of sense. If you like the hybrid model I'm suggesting (i.e., you can tank or dps, and do either effectively, but you CAN'T do them both to full effect at the same time), then by moving all the dps stuff into one line and all the tank stuff in another line you allow monks to stack up on either dps or survivability. As it stands now, its very hard to get lots of defensive abilities from the EoF line because in order to get the +deflection chance, +deflection, +parry, +hp, or +defense you have to spend 12 points in dps abilities first. This essentially forces us into doing mediocre dps and mediocre tanking simultaneously, instead of solid tanking OR solid dps. Simply by rearranging several abilities, we give monks a chance to specialize and choose their role.</blockquote>Actually the crit on the int line is pretty close to useless seeing as how we can get our crit up near to max without it. The DA however is useful. All you would be doing is causing people who need deflection chance to have to use 8 extra points to get it since they probably would already have the da bonus anyways.</blockquote>I don't think you're understanding what I'm saying. Under my model it takes LESS points to get the deflection chance, not more. The str and int lines would look like this:+int--->Eagle spin-->Deflection chance-->Parry-->Survivability special as endline+str-->Pressure Point-->Double Attack-->Melee crit-->chiSo now you get deflection chance after 8 points spent (4 in +int, 4 in eagle spin) instead of after 12 (4 in str, 4 pressure point, 4 DA). No changes to those abilities, just moving them around so you get EITHER defensive ones OR offensive ones, instead of half defense half offense</blockquote>You are wrong. Lets put it this way, there isn't a good monk build without DA in the str line period. There are however plenty of good monk builds that never even touch the int line. You would be FORCING another 8 points spent for anyone who would want deflection chance. While your so called fix would be ok for pure DPS builds it completely sucks for any type of hybrid/tanking builds. It would be an absolutely horrible decision.

BChizzle

05-03-2009, 05:21 PM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>I already stated that you have problem in reading and comprehension. Your posts confirmed it again and again.I said you are in offensive stance with dps gear and your post just confirmed it.On the contrary, I said I am always in defensive gear and tanking in defensive stance due to different raid set up, server connection stability, etc.So who is the idiot with no clue of his post? You.</blockquote>I tank in what you call my offensive set up, which part of that don't you get? I am sorry you are such a horrible player you can't manage tanking in offensive, but don't say other people can't read simply because you are a scrub.

Couching

05-03-2009, 05:23 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>I already stated that you have problem in reading and comprehension. Your posts confirmed it again and again.I said you are in offensive stance with dps gear and your post just confirmed it.On the contrary, I said I am always in defensive gear and tanking in defensive stance due to different raid set up, server connection stability, etc.So who is the idiot with no clue of his post? You.</blockquote>I tank in what you call my offensive set up, which part of that don't you get? I am sorry you are such a horrible player you can't manage tanking in offensive, but don't say other people can't read simply because you are a scrub.</blockquote>Yawn, when did I say you can or can't tank in offensive? That's you are not just scrub in game but scrub in real life. /shrugGo back to pre-k is the best way to improve your reading comprehension.

BChizzle

05-03-2009, 05:24 PM

<cite>Rythalian@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>QFT re: Chizzle. LoL at your "I did 12K so all monks aren't broken." You need to bone up on your logic skills a little.</blockquote>Way to change my quote. Thats what you guys are stooping too now how pathetic. I said monk DPS is fine, I never said monks aren't broken I have been quite forward about saying our tanking/survivability needs a boost, however, you guys complaining about DPS are completely wrong.

BChizzle

05-03-2009, 05:27 PM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Yawn, when did I say you can or can't tank in offensive? That's you are not just scrub in game but scrub in real life. /shrugGo back to pre-k is the best way to raise your reading comprehension.</blockquote>Ya good one, now trying the real life card [Removed for Content] how pathetic. It is pretty clear since you can't tell the difference between the words need and want that the one with the reading problem is you. It is also pretty clear you parse like garbage and your ideas are absolutely horrible.

Couching

05-03-2009, 05:38 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Yawn, when did I say you can or can't tank in offensive? That's you are not just scrub in game but scrub in real life. /shrugGo back to pre-k is the best way to raise your reading comprehension.</blockquote>Ya good one, now trying the real life card [Removed for Content] how pathetic. It is pretty clear since you can't tell the difference between the words need and want that the one with the reading problem is you. It is also pretty clear you parse like garbage and your ideas are absolutely horrible.</blockquote>/yawn, whining, whining and more whining.

BChizzle

05-03-2009, 05:39 PM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Yawn, when did I say you can or can't tank in offensive? That's you are not just scrub in game but scrub in real life. /shrugGo back to pre-k is the best way to raise your reading comprehension.</blockquote>Ya good one, now trying the real life card [Removed for Content] how pathetic. It is pretty clear since you can't tell the difference between the words need and want that the one with the reading problem is you. It is also pretty clear you parse like garbage and your ideas are absolutely horrible.</blockquote>/yawn, whining, whining and more whining.</blockquote>/yawn useless useless useless

Couching

05-03-2009, 05:40 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rythalian@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>QFT re: Chizzle. LoL at your "I did 12K so all monks aren't broken." You need to bone up on your logic skills a little.</blockquote>Way to change my quote. Thats what you guys are stooping too now how pathetic. I said monk DPS is fine, I never said monks aren't broken I have been quite forward about saying our tanking/survivability needs a boost, however, you guys complaining about DPS are completely wrong.</blockquote>Wrong, monk dps is not fine when plate tanks can out parse you easily. Fact is 12k is horrible for any plate tanks in offensive stance and dps gear in gynok fight.

Morrolan V

05-03-2009, 05:45 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rythalian@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>QFT re: Chizzle. LoL at your "I did 12K so all monks aren't broken." You need to bone up on your logic skills a little.</blockquote>Way to change my quote. Thats what you guys are stooping too now how pathetic. I said monk DPS is fine, I never said monks aren't broken I have been quite forward about saying our tanking/survivability needs a boost, however, you guys complaining about DPS are completely wrong.</blockquote>I stand corrected. You are still wrong and your logic skills still suck. The fact that YOU did 12K on Gynok is not evidence that monk DPS in general is fine.

BChizzle

05-03-2009, 05:47 PM

<cite>Rythalian@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rythalian@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>QFT re: Chizzle. LoL at your "I did 12K so all monks aren't broken." You need to bone up on your logic skills a little.</blockquote>Way to change my quote. Thats what you guys are stooping too now how pathetic. I said monk DPS is fine, I never said monks aren't broken I have been quite forward about saying our tanking/survivability needs a boost, however, you guys complaining about DPS are completely wrong.</blockquote>I stand corrected. You are still wrong and your logic skills still suck. The fact that YOU did 12K on Gynok is not evidence that monk DPS in general is fine.</blockquote>Actually 12k is absolutely fine, what do your tanks do? As a matter of fact, Couching what do your tanks do?

BChizzle

05-03-2009, 05:48 PM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rythalian@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>QFT re: Chizzle. LoL at your "I did 12K so all monks aren't broken." You need to bone up on your logic skills a little.</blockquote>Way to change my quote. Thats what you guys are stooping too now how pathetic. I said monk DPS is fine, I never said monks aren't broken I have been quite forward about saying our tanking/survivability needs a boost, however, you guys complaining about DPS are completely wrong.</blockquote>Wrong, monk dps is not fine when plate tanks can out parse you easily. Fact is 12k is horrible for any plate tanks in offensive stance and dps gear in gynok fight.</blockquote>Since none of your tanks are nowhere near that, please explain.

Couching

05-03-2009, 06:00 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rythalian@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rythalian@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>QFT re: Chizzle. LoL at your "I did 12K so all monks aren't broken." You need to bone up on your logic skills a little.</blockquote>Way to change my quote. Thats what you guys are stooping too now how pathetic. I said monk DPS is fine, I never said monks aren't broken I have been quite forward about saying our tanking/survivability needs a boost, however, you guys complaining about DPS are completely wrong.</blockquote>I stand corrected. You are still wrong and your logic skills still suck. The fact that YOU did 12K on Gynok is not evidence that monk DPS in general is fine.</blockquote>Actually 12k is absolutely fine, what do your tanks do? As a matter of fact, Couching what do your tanks do?</blockquote>Either guild SK or zerker has less dps gear than you and they did 12-14k and that's the number with shield and they were tanking, lower hit rate.Our SK did almost 12k in last gynok in a very bad group setup, no accuracy buff or + weapon skill buff. His hit rate is only 42%. Even though, his dps is about equal to your best parse and you have 95%+ hit rate.I can't see why monk dps is fine comparing to plate tanks.

circusgirl

05-03-2009, 06:44 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Vinka@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Vinka@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Actually, switching the defensive ability (deflection chance) in the str line for the offensive ability (melee crit) in the int line makes a LOT of sense. If you like the hybrid model I'm suggesting (i.e., you can tank or dps, and do either effectively, but you CAN'T do them both to full effect at the same time), then by moving all the dps stuff into one line and all the tank stuff in another line you allow monks to stack up on either dps or survivability. As it stands now, its very hard to get lots of defensive abilities from the EoF line because in order to get the +deflection chance, +deflection, +parry, +hp, or +defense you have to spend 12 points in dps abilities first. This essentially forces us into doing mediocre dps and mediocre tanking simultaneously, instead of solid tanking OR solid dps. Simply by rearranging several abilities, we give monks a chance to specialize and choose their role.</blockquote>Actually the crit on the int line is pretty close to useless seeing as how we can get our crit up near to max without it. The DA however is useful. All you would be doing is causing people who need deflection chance to have to use 8 extra points to get it since they probably would already have the da bonus anyways.</blockquote>I don't think you're understanding what I'm saying. Under my model it takes LESS points to get the deflection chance, not more. The str and int lines would look like this:+int--->Eagle spin-->Deflection chance-->Parry-->Survivability special as endline+str-->Pressure Point-->Double Attack-->Melee crit-->chiSo now you get deflection chance after 8 points spent (4 in +int, 4 in eagle spin) instead of after 12 (4 in str, 4 pressure point, 4 DA). No changes to those abilities, just moving them around so you get EITHER defensive ones OR offensive ones, instead of half defense half offense</blockquote>You are wrong. Lets put it this way, there isn't a good monk build without DA in the str line period. There are however plenty of good monk builds that never even touch the int line. You would be FORCING another 8 points spent for anyone who would want deflection chance. While your so called fix would be ok for pure DPS builds it completely sucks for any type of hybrid/tanking builds. It would be an absolutely horrible decision.</blockquote>Okay, let me try to explain this one more time, BChiz. These proposed swaps were part of a vision for the class in which we were comparable to plate tanks, if still slightly behind them, defensively, and approaching rogues in dps. Now, obviously, if we have plate tank survivability with rogue dps that would be horrendously overpowered. Duh. SO, I proposed balancing the class by making us viable but not the best in both tanking and dps, with the caveat that we cannot do BOTH SIMULTANEOUSLY. Hence, seperating things like double attack, a dps ability, from deflection chance, a defensive ability. Because under this class vision we get buffs to both tanking and dps, and it would be overpowering to have both at the same time. Right now you are correct, monks should always go down the str line and get the double attack. However, under the hybrid class vision I am proposing, it's necessary to seperate out the dps and the tanking abilities to force individual monks to choose which they want. Overall, this would result in a drop in our dps but a large increase in survivability when tanking, and a large increase in our dps but a steep drop in survivability when dpsing. With what I am proposing there WOULD be a viable monk spec that didn't involve double attack, because the int line would be highly desireable when tanking.

BChizzle

05-03-2009, 06:45 PM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Either guild SK or zerker has less dps gear than you and they did 12-14k and that's the number with shield and they were tanking, lower hit rate.Our SK did almost 12k in last gynok in a very bad group setup, no accuracy buff or + weapon skill buff. His hit rate is only 42%. Even though, his dps is about equal to your best parse and you have 95%+ hit rate.I can't see why monk dps is fine comparing to plate tanks.</blockquote>So your SK does less then me on an AE fight but monk dps is bad? Also since when do SK's not wear shields? Watch out guys DW SK's are on the way!And your zerk does a little bit more then me sometimes on an AE fight and monk DPS is bad its an AE fight and your zerk barely beats a monk, I bet you I kill him on single targets amirite?42% hit rate sorry I seriously doubt it but maybe the problem is you guys need to gear and buff properly, since even my guardian hits for 77%. Also I didn't have 95%+ hit rate not that it matters. but if I did hit for 95% I'd probably come out around 13-14k dps, did I mention no brig in the raid either?

BChizzle

05-03-2009, 06:48 PM

<cite>Vinka@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Okay, let me try to explain this one more time, BChiz. These proposed swaps were part of a vision for the class in which we were comparable to plate tanks, if still slightly behind them, defensively, and approaching rogues in dps. Now, obviously, if we have plate tank survivability with rogue dps that would be horrendously overpowered. Duh. SO, I proposed balancing the class by making us viable but not the best in both tanking and dps, with the caveat that we cannot do BOTH SIMULTANEOUSLY. Hence, seperating things like double attack, a dps ability, from deflection chance, a defensive ability. Because under this class vision we get buffs to both tanking and dps, and it would be overpowering to have both at the same time. Right now you are correct, monks should always go down the str line and get the double attack. However, under the hybrid class vision I am proposing, it's necessary to seperate out the dps and the tanking abilities to force individual monks to choose which they want. Overall, this would result in a drop in our dps but a large increase in survivability when tanking, and a large increase in our dps but a steep drop in survivability when dpsing. </blockquote>HOLDING AGRO IS A DEFENSIVE ABILITY! DA helps you HOLD AGRO.Also in your so called hybrid crap you would still need DA, and switching the AA spots does nothing for survivability it just makes the AA tree less effective. Thank god you dont work for SOE.You are corrected.

Couching

05-03-2009, 07:01 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Either guild SK or zerker has less dps gear than you and they did 12-14k and that's the number with shield and they were tanking, lower hit rate.Our SK did almost 12k in last gynok in a very bad group setup, no accuracy buff or + weapon skill buff. His hit rate is only 42%. Even though, his dps is about equal to your best parse and you have 95%+ hit rate.I can't see why monk dps is fine comparing to plate tanks.</blockquote>So your SK does less then me on an AE fight but monk dps is bad? Also since when do SK's not wear shields? Watch out guys DW SK's are on the way!And your zerk does a little bit more then me sometimes on an AE fight and monk DPS is bad its an AE fight and your zerk barely beats a monk, I bet you I kill him on single targets amirite?42% hit rate sorry I seriously doubt it but maybe the problem is you guys need to gear and buff properly, since even my guardian hits for 77%. Also I didn't have 95%+ hit rate not that it matters. but if I did hit for 95% I'd probably come out around 13-14k dps, did I mention no brig in the raid either?</blockquote>Yes, our dps is bad. You didn't have better dps than our sk. His best parse is 14k. Not to say, the difference of gear and raid setup.I already stated that their gear and raid setup were worse than you and they were tanking. You ignored that fact that highend sk and zerker with proper buff can deal much higher dps.Fyi, SK has better single target dps than monk as well.

Siatfallen

05-03-2009, 07:14 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Vinka@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Okay, let me try to explain this one more time, BChiz. These proposed swaps were part of a vision for the class in which we were comparable to plate tanks, if still slightly behind them, defensively, and approaching rogues in dps. Now, obviously, if we have plate tank survivability with rogue dps that would be horrendously overpowered. Duh. SO, I proposed balancing the class by making us viable but not the best in both tanking and dps, with the caveat that we cannot do BOTH SIMULTANEOUSLY. Hence, seperating things like double attack, a dps ability, from deflection chance, a defensive ability. Because under this class vision we get buffs to both tanking and dps, and it would be overpowering to have both at the same time. Right now you are correct, monks should always go down the str line and get the double attack. However, under the hybrid class vision I am proposing, it's necessary to seperate out the dps and the tanking abilities to force individual monks to choose which they want. Overall, this would result in a drop in our dps but a large increase in survivability when tanking, and a large increase in our dps but a steep drop in survivability when dpsing. </blockquote>HOLDING AGRO IS A DEFENSIVE ABILITY! DA helps you HOLD AGRO.Also in your so called hybrid crap you would still need DA, and switching the AA spots does nothing for survivability it just makes the AA tree less effective. Thank god you dont work for SOE.You are corrected.</blockquote>You're just trying to misunderstand at this point, aren't you?Consider this: Str line gives enhanced ST DPS.Wis line gives enhanced AE DPS.Sta line gives aggro (I'm a bit iffy on how that's going to be achieved since it'd obviously have to generate more aggro than both str and wis, but for the sake of the argument, let's assume it's done succesfully).Int line gives survivability.Agi line gives reduced recast timers (In which case I'd actually suggest moving Chi over there, but that's an aside for now).With 70 points, you can take 2½ tree or so, depending on how many points you spend on each. That means - hold on here - that you'd have to specialise. You know, what the AA lines were designed for in the first place?Tanking spec for ST: Probably int, sta and partial one of the other three.Tanking spec, AE: Int, sta, partial wis (or wis and partial sta)DPS spec: Str, Wis, partial agi.This solution is going to be a load of work for devs to implement, will take some serious effort to properly balance, and may fail still... But if pulled off correctly, it's put the monk class back as the hybrid class we need to be. You're free to think that's stupid, of course. That's called a difference of vision, nothing else.My pessimism in regards to this vision, as much as I'd like to see it come true, comes from the likelihood of the devs choosing to put in the work to get it all properly balanced. They may seek a simpler solution.

BChizzle

05-03-2009, 07:51 PM

<cite>Siatfallen wrote:</cite><blockquote>You're just trying to misunderstand at this point, aren't you?Consider this: Str line gives enhanced ST DPS.Wis line gives enhanced AE DPS.Sta line gives aggro (I'm a bit iffy on how that's going to be achieved since it'd obviously have to generate more aggro than both str and wis, but for the sake of the argument, let's assume it's done succesfully).Int line gives survivability.Agi line gives reduced recast timers (In which case I'd actually suggest moving Chi over there, but that's an aside for now).With 70 points, you can take 2½ tree or so, depending on how many points you spend on each. That means - hold on here - that you'd have to specialise. You know, what the AA lines were designed for in the first place?Tanking spec for ST: Probably int, sta and partial one of the other three.Tanking spec, AE: Int, sta, partial wis (or wis and partial sta)DPS spec: Str, Wis, partial agi.This solution is going to be a load of work for devs to implement, will take some serious effort to properly balance, and may fail still... But if pulled off correctly, it's put the monk class back as the hybrid class we need to be. You're free to think that's stupid, of course. That's called a difference of vision, nothing else.My pessimism in regards to this vision, as much as I'd like to see it come true, comes from the likelihood of the devs choosing to put in the work to get it all properly balanced. They may seek a simpler solution.</blockquote>So you go from swapping two AA's and now rebuild our whole AA tree to suit your argument? LOL

BChizzle

05-03-2009, 07:53 PM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Either guild SK or zerker has less dps gear than you and they did 12-14k and that's the number with shield and they were tanking, lower hit rate.Our SK did almost 12k in last gynok in a very bad group setup, no accuracy buff or + weapon skill buff. His hit rate is only 42%. Even though, his dps is about equal to your best parse and you have 95%+ hit rate.I can't see why monk dps is fine comparing to plate tanks.</blockquote>So your SK does less then me on an AE fight but monk dps is bad? Also since when do SK's not wear shields? Watch out guys DW SK's are on the way!And your zerk does a little bit more then me sometimes on an AE fight and monk DPS is bad its an AE fight and your zerk barely beats a monk, I bet you I kill him on single targets amirite?42% hit rate sorry I seriously doubt it but maybe the problem is you guys need to gear and buff properly, since even my guardian hits for 77%. Also I didn't have 95%+ hit rate not that it matters. but if I did hit for 95% I'd probably come out around 13-14k dps, did I mention no brig in the raid either?</blockquote>Yes, our dps is bad. You didn't have better dps than our sk. His best parse is 14k. Not to say, the difference of gear and raid setup.I already stated that their gear and raid setup were worse than you and they were tanking. You ignored that fact that highend sk and zerker with proper buff can deal much higher dps.Fyi, SK has better single target dps than monk as well.</blockquote>In theory though since I am not raiding with your scrub tanks but tanks equally geared as me, shouldn't I be blown out of the water? But I am not, so where does that leave us? If I was buffed to high hell and tanking Gynok I suspect the numbers I could put up would be pretty kickbutt TBH, I did 12k with meh buffs, 14-15-16k really is not that unrealistic.

Couching

05-03-2009, 07:59 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Either guild SK or zerker has less dps gear than you and they did 12-14k and that's the number with shield and they were tanking, lower hit rate.Our SK did almost 12k in last gynok in a very bad group setup, no accuracy buff or + weapon skill buff. His hit rate is only 42%. Even though, his dps is about equal to your best parse and you have 95%+ hit rate.I can't see why monk dps is fine comparing to plate tanks.</blockquote>So your SK does less then me on an AE fight but monk dps is bad? Also since when do SK's not wear shields? Watch out guys DW SK's are on the way!And your zerk does a little bit more then me sometimes on an AE fight and monk DPS is bad its an AE fight and your zerk barely beats a monk, I bet you I kill him on single targets amirite?42% hit rate sorry I seriously doubt it but maybe the problem is you guys need to gear and buff properly, since even my guardian hits for 77%. Also I didn't have 95%+ hit rate not that it matters. but if I did hit for 95% I'd probably come out around 13-14k dps, did I mention no brig in the raid either?</blockquote>Yes, our dps is bad. You didn't have better dps than our sk. His best parse is 14k. Not to say, the difference of gear and raid setup.I already stated that their gear and raid setup were worse than you and they were tanking. You ignored that fact that highend sk and zerker with proper buff can deal much higher dps.Fyi, SK has better single target dps than monk as well.</blockquote>In theory though since I am not raiding with your scrub tanks but tanks equally geared as me, shouldn't I be blown out of the water? But I am not, so where does that leave us? If I was buffed to high hell and tanking Gynok I suspect the numbers I could put up would be pretty kickass TBH, I did 12k with meh buffs, 14-15-16k really is not that unrealistic.</blockquote>So our scrub plate tanks, worse gear and raid setup, deal more dps than your plate tanks. Who is scrub? The answer is clear. Thank you for telling us the truth why you feel your dps is fine.

BChizzle

05-03-2009, 08:02 PM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>So our scrub plate tanks, worse gear and raid setup, deal more dps than your plate tanks. Who is scrub? The answer is clear. Thank you for telling us the truth why you feel your dps is fine.</blockquote>Pretty positive they don't. Since I double your dps it is pretty safe to say they probably smoke your little crappy tanks just the same.

Couching

05-03-2009, 08:06 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>So our scrub plate tanks, worse gear and raid setup, deal more dps than your plate tanks. Who is scrub? The answer is clear. Thank you for telling us the truth why you feel your dps is fine.</blockquote>Pretty positive they don't. Since I double your dps it is pretty safe to say they probably smoke your little crappy tanks just the same.</blockquote>It's a simple logic, if a> b and b> c, then a >c.It's you said that your dps is better than your plate tanks and our plate tanks dps owned you hard. So our plate tanks dps is higher than your tanks./shrug, I know, it's too hard for scrub to understand.

BChizzle

05-03-2009, 08:21 PM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>So our scrub plate tanks, worse gear and raid setup, deal more dps than your plate tanks. Who is scrub? The answer is clear. Thank you for telling us the truth why you feel your dps is fine.</blockquote>Pretty positive they don't. Since I double your dps it is pretty safe to say they probably smoke your little crappy tanks just the same.</blockquote>It's a simple logic, if a> b and b> c, then a >c.It's you said that your dps is better than your plate tanks and our plate tanks dps owned you hard. So our plate tanks dps is higher than your tanks./shrug, I know, it's too hard for scrub to understand.</blockquote>Hmm SK 93.86% to-hit rate, hmm Zerker 80.93% to-hit rate. Pretty much says it all doesn't it?

circusgirl

05-03-2009, 08:21 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Siatfallen wrote:</cite><blockquote>You're just trying to misunderstand at this point, aren't you?Consider this: Str line gives enhanced ST DPS.Wis line gives enhanced AE DPS.Sta line gives aggro (I'm a bit iffy on how that's going to be achieved since it'd obviously have to generate more aggro than both str and wis, but for the sake of the argument, let's assume it's done succesfully).Int line gives survivability.Agi line gives reduced recast timers (In which case I'd actually suggest moving Chi over there, but that's an aside for now).With 70 points, you can take 2½ tree or so, depending on how many points you spend on each. That means - hold on here - that you'd have to specialise. You know, what the AA lines were designed for in the first place?Tanking spec for ST: Probably int, sta and partial one of the other three.Tanking spec, AE: Int, sta, partial wis (or wis and partial sta)DPS spec: Str, Wis, partial agi.This solution is going to be a load of work for devs to implement, will take some serious effort to properly balance, and may fail still... But if pulled off correctly, it's put the monk class back as the hybrid class we need to be. You're free to think that's stupid, of course. That's called a difference of vision, nothing else.My pessimism in regards to this vision, as much as I'd like to see it come true, comes from the likelihood of the devs choosing to put in the work to get it all properly balanced. They may seek a simpler solution.</blockquote>So you go from swapping two AA's and now rebuild our whole AA tree to suit your argument? LOL</blockquote>Good lord, your reading comprehension needs work. If you go back and look at what I originally wrote, you'll find that there are loads more suggestions about changing things up for the brawler AA lines. Everything that Eilien wrote about in her post is there except for moving chi over to the agi line. I am advocating completely redoing the AA lines in order to make brawlers choose to be either offensive or defensive. That lets the ones that want to tank, tank, and the ones that want to dps, dps. Yes, I seriously do think that the best way to fix us is to rebuild our AA options. Yes, this is a lot of work. No, it probably won't happen. I still think its the right way to go about things though.

BChizzle

05-03-2009, 08:23 PM

<cite>Vinka@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Good lord, your reading comprehension needs work. If you go back and look at what I originally wrote, you'll find that there are loads more suggestions about changing things up for the brawler AA lines. Everything that Eilien wrote about in her post is there except for moving chi over to the agi line. I am advocating completely redoing the AA lines in order to make brawlers choose to be either offensive or defensive. That lets the ones that want to tank, tank, and the ones that want to dps, dps. Yes, I seriously do think that the best way to fix us is to rebuild our AA options. Yes, this is a lot of work. No, it probably won't happen. I still think its the right way to go about things though. </blockquote>Moving our aa's around is useless. They will still be crap AA's. Like I said all you did was [Removed for Content] 95% of all AA builds with your suggestion.

Morrolan V

05-03-2009, 08:34 PM

<cite>Siatfallen wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Vinka@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Okay, let me try to explain this one more time, BChiz. These proposed swaps were part of a vision for the class in which we were comparable to plate tanks, if still slightly behind them, defensively, and approaching rogues in dps. Now, obviously, if we have plate tank survivability with rogue dps that would be horrendously overpowered. Duh. SO, I proposed balancing the class by making us viable but not the best in both tanking and dps, with the caveat that we cannot do BOTH SIMULTANEOUSLY. Hence, seperating things like double attack, a dps ability, from deflection chance, a defensive ability. Because under this class vision we get buffs to both tanking and dps, and it would be overpowering to have both at the same time. Right now you are correct, monks should always go down the str line and get the double attack. However, under the hybrid class vision I am proposing, it's necessary to seperate out the dps and the tanking abilities to force individual monks to choose which they want. Overall, this would result in a drop in our dps but a large increase in survivability when tanking, and a large increase in our dps but a steep drop in survivability when dpsing. </blockquote>HOLDING AGRO IS A DEFENSIVE ABILITY! DA helps you HOLD AGRO.Also in your so called hybrid crap you would still need DA, and switching the AA spots does nothing for survivability it just makes the AA tree less effective. Thank god you dont work for SOE.You are corrected.</blockquote>You're just trying to misunderstand at this point, aren't you?Consider this: Str line gives enhanced ST DPS.Wis line gives enhanced AE DPS.Sta line gives aggro (I'm a bit iffy on how that's going to be achieved since it'd obviously have to generate more aggro than both str and wis, but for the sake of the argument, let's assume it's done succesfully).Int line gives survivability.Agi line gives reduced recast timers (In which case I'd actually suggest moving Chi over there, but that's an aside for now).With 70 points, you can take 2½ tree or so, depending on how many points you spend on each. That means - hold on here - that you'd have to specialise. You know, what the AA lines were designed for in the first place?Tanking spec for ST: Probably int, sta and partial one of the other three.Tanking spec, AE: Int, sta, partial wis (or wis and partial sta)DPS spec: Str, Wis, partial agi.This solution is going to be a load of work for devs to implement, will take some serious effort to properly balance, and may fail still... But if pulled off correctly, it's put the monk class back as the hybrid class we need to be. You're free to think that's stupid, of course. That's called a difference of vision, nothing else.My pessimism in regards to this vision, as much as I'd like to see it come true, comes from the likelihood of the devs choosing to put in the work to get it all properly balanced. They may seek a simpler solution.</blockquote>/agree on all counts, Siat.BTW, at this point, whether Chizzle is actively trying to misunderstand and derail this thread or not, he's doing a [Removed for Content] good job. We should stop feeding him. He's sure to get bored and go chase something shiny.

BChizzle

05-03-2009, 08:37 PM

<cite>Rythalian@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>/agree on all counts, Siat.BTW, at this point, whether Chizzle is actively trying to misunderstand and derail this thread or not, he's doing a [Removed for Content] good job. We should stop feeding him. He's sure to get bored and go chase something shiny.</blockquote>Lemmings will follow each other off of a cliff I however would rather step aside and laugh at the stupidtrain.

circusgirl

05-03-2009, 09:04 PM

You are wise beyond your years, Rythalian. Let the troll-feeding stop.Okay, so in terms of reworking the AA lines, what do we think should be done with sta? I'd like to see it have a focused goal, rather than spreading itself out across the spectrum, but the question is how do we get there?

BChizzle

05-03-2009, 09:18 PM

Lethe5683

05-03-2009, 09:20 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Vinka@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>You are wise beyond your years, Rythalian. Let the troll-feeding stop.Okay, so in terms of reworking the AA lines, what do we think should be done with sta? I'd like to see it have a focused goal, rather than spreading itself out across the spectrum, but the question is how do we get there?</blockquote>Like anyone cares what 2 monks who are pretty much still raiding RoK have to say.</blockquote>Like anyone cares what some random troll says.

Derang

05-03-2009, 09:36 PM

<cite>Vinka@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>You are wise beyond your years, Rythalian. Let the troll-feeding stop.Okay, so in terms of reworking the AA lines, what do we think should be done with sta? I'd like to see it have a focused goal, rather than spreading itself out across the spectrum, but the question is how do we get there?</blockquote>+Taunt Base amount on 1 aa, maybe 2% aa total of 16%+3% Chance to successful Deflection to Ward 250 dmg, then 3%/50 dmg each aa, total 24% 600dmg+Minimun Deflection Chance, .5 an aa total of 4+Mit Increase/Hate gain passive on our Def stance, maybe 2 mit, 10hate gain - EndlineLets also remember the piece of crap EoF line needs some serious work for hybrid class...tanking endline/dps/utility, the ones we have now are pathetic.

BChizzle

05-03-2009, 09:46 PM

<cite>Deranged wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Vinka@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>You are wise beyond your years, Rythalian. Let the troll-feeding stop.Okay, so in terms of reworking the AA lines, what do we think should be done with sta? I'd like to see it have a focused goal, rather than spreading itself out across the spectrum, but the question is how do we get there?</blockquote>+Taunt Base amount on 1 aa, maybe 2% aa total of 16%+3% Chance to successful Deflection to Ward 250 dmg, then 3%/50 dmg each aa, total 24% 600dmg+Minimun Deflection Chance, .5 an aa total of 4+Mit Increase/Hate gain passive on our Def stance, maybe 2 mit, 10hate gain - EndlineLets also remember the piece of crap EoF line needs some serious work for hybrid class...tanking endline/dps/utility, the ones we have now are pathetic.</blockquote>Wow funny, people talk trash about me saying our survivability needs fixing and first chance you guys get to make AA's you pick defensive ones lawl.

Siatfallen

05-04-2009, 02:34 AM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Deranged wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Vinka@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>You are wise beyond your years, Rythalian. Let the troll-feeding stop.Okay, so in terms of reworking the AA lines, what do we think should be done with sta? I'd like to see it have a focused goal, rather than spreading itself out across the spectrum, but the question is how do we get there?</blockquote>+Taunt Base amount on 1 aa, maybe 2% aa total of 16%+3% Chance to successful Deflection to Ward 250 dmg, then 3%/50 dmg each aa, total 24% 600dmg+Minimun Deflection Chance, .5 an aa total of 4+Mit Increase/Hate gain passive on our Def stance, maybe 2 mit, 10hate gain - EndlineLets also remember the piece of crap EoF line needs some serious work for hybrid class...tanking endline/dps/utility, the ones we have now are pathetic.</blockquote>Wow funny, people talk trash about me saying our survivability needs fixing and first chance you guys get to make AA's you pick defensive ones lawl.</blockquote>On this entire idea: The fighter trees are generally a jumble in that they mix DPS and survivability options into the same lines, giving only few of them a really clear purpose. This seems to work for the plate fighters, whose primary purpose is clear in the first place, but it is a detriment to the brawler classes, giving us more worst of both worlds options, instead of allowing us to specialise. The one exception in the brawler tree is the wis line - which is still as underpowered as the rest.Look up the rogue AA tree some time. There's a useless line in there (wis), and very few do not spec for some sort of str/agi spec - but most of the lines have a clear and defined purpose.I do think asking for this revision is getting into the realm of overtly wishful thinking. But I think it could work.Deranged: Honestly, I'd like some of the old tree structure to remain in place - the + stat, semi-useless CA and then two decent abilties followed by an endline, simply because it forces anyone to spend 8 points in the tree to get to the abilities that will really make a difference, rather than being able to immediately shop for the useful things. We may simply end up allowing monks to buy the best of everything if we steer away from that structure.BChizzle: I'd assume he's trying to work with the vision presented. Sta was put forth as the aggro line, so of course he's not going to suggest DPS modifiers for it - if it's only DPS he wanted, he'd just pick up str, wis and some of agi anyway.

BChizzle

05-04-2009, 04:40 AM

<cite>Siatfallen wrote:</cite><blockquote>BChizzle: I'd assume he's trying to work with the vision presented. Sta was put forth as the aggro line, so of course he's not going to suggest DPS modifiers for it - if it's only DPS he wanted, he'd just pick up str, wis and some of agi anyway.</blockquote>Trying to fix a class through AA forces certain AA builds even more so while also dramatically changing how a class works, you don't need such a massive overhaul that people don't know what class they are playing anymore. The class needs to be fixed at its core mechanics, if you break it down, and I'll even include dps for you guys.DPS - Higher CA's and perhaps some sort of EoF endline AA that can actually be effective and an offhand that isn't as horrible as the ones currently available.AE Agro - AE auto attack, taunts attached to our blues, green faster recast.Survivability - Solution to Strikethrough problem, be it that monks can't be hit with strikethrough or a certain amount of strikethrough damage is mitigated. Change our med heal AA back to the 40% it was before they dropped the tank changes.Other - Something really really needs to be done with the fact that we proc damage shields/reactives more then any other tank, our haste high hit rates and low delays put us at a huge disadvantage here, perhaps some sort of % immune to the damage shield/reactives, maybe make it our group buff since we don't have one of those, kind of like a small regenerating ward that gives a % to be immune to damage shield/reactive effects.

Morgane

05-04-2009, 12:23 PM

<cite>Vinka@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>You are wise beyond your years, Rythalian. Let the troll-feeding stop.Okay, so in terms of reworking the AA lines, what do we think should be done with sta? I'd like to see it have a focused goal, rather than spreading itself out across the spectrum, but the question is how do we get there?</blockquote>I stopped feeding him a few pages back. The guy is either as thick as a cinder brick or he's deliberately being obtuse because he can't admit he's wrong. Regardless of his reasoning, he's sure not able accept that other people can have opinions, too.By the way, has anyone noticed that a forum mod hasn't shut this thread down yet? I have a feeling this would have been cut short on the main forum. A testament to how little the Monk forums are read by SoE, perhaps? *sigh*

Morgane

05-04-2009, 12:24 PM

<cite>Deranged wrote:</cite><blockquote>Lets also remember the piece of crap EoF line needs some serious work for hybrid class...tanking endline/dps/utility, the ones we have now are pathetic.</blockquote>QFE!

Morgane

05-04-2009, 12:29 PM

Double post

Derang

05-04-2009, 05:26 PM

Stabbath

05-04-2009, 09:31 PM

It's the bait and switch method. Monks spend a long time leveling, then when they hit 80, wish they rolled a sk. They reroll sks, level them to 80 then sks will be nerf. Keeps people playing year after year<img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" /> Or at least those who don't quit from frustration.I loved my monk til high level. Monks are great if you only want to play EQ2 for a short time. The only thing that shines with Monks is FD, but SKs get that.....

Stabbath

05-04-2009, 09:40 PM

I compared myself fighting those lava mobs with a crap geared paly. He was way more consistent with taking very little damage than me/my monk. Maybe we're supposed to rely on our one shot heal? I dunno.

Kiori

05-04-2009, 09:41 PM

I applaud Chizzle for bringing the lol factor to this thread.It is clear you disagree with so many who post here, so it makes me wonder why you do, if its to convince others of the power of your argument, then the evidence is, from what I have read, it doesnt seem to have much power.If its to Argue with others who disagree with your opinion, then more power to you, the evidence clearly points to this.Apologies to the rest for butting into your thread.

circusgirl

05-04-2009, 10:03 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Siatfallen wrote:</cite><blockquote>BChizzle: I'd assume he's trying to work with the vision presented. Sta was put forth as the aggro line, so of course he's not going to suggest DPS modifiers for it - if it's only DPS he wanted, he'd just pick up str, wis and some of agi anyway.</blockquote>Trying to fix a class through AA forces certain AA builds even more so while also dramatically changing how a class works, you don't need such a massive overhaul that people don't know what class they are playing anymore. The class needs to be fixed at its core mechanics, if you break it down, and I'll even include dps for you guys.DPS - Higher CA's and perhaps some sort of EoF endline AA that can actually be effective and an offhand that isn't as horrible as the ones currently available.AE Agro - AE auto attack, taunts attached to our blues, green faster recast.Survivability - Solution to Strikethrough problem, be it that monks can't be hit with strikethrough or a certain amount of strikethrough damage is mitigated. Change our med heal AA back to the 40% it was before they dropped the tank changes.Other - Something really really needs to be done with the fact that we proc damage shields/reactives more then any other tank, our haste high hit rates and low delays put us at a huge disadvantage here, perhaps some sort of % immune to the damage shield/reactives, maybe make it our group buff since we don't have one of those, kind of like a small regenerating ward that gives a % to be immune to damage shield/reactive effects.</blockquote>Honestly a bit of the point of my suggestion was to force certain AA builds--my vision for the class is one that is simultaneously EITHER a high survivability/mediocre dps tank OR a mediocre survivability/high dpser. As it would be obviously overpowered to have BOTH the high dps and the high survivability, you have to create some method for monks to obtain one or the other but not both. This is why I haven't been suggesting much in the way of our core abilities being changed, as those fixes affect every monk whether they choose to dps or tank. We're far enough behind the other tanks that yes, we could have small buffs to both survivability and dps and still be balanced, but if we really want to be solid in both fields, then I don't think we can have both at the same time and still be a balanced class.The reason I'm targeting balancing us through AAs is twofold: first, our AAs are below par and due for a revamp anyway, and second, because having more options than we have points to spend allows monks to specialize based on what the player wants to do with the class. Its really the only way I can see to get around the constant arguments between the people that want to tank and the people that want to be high dps emergency quasi-tanks.As far as your actual suggestions go, I pretty much agree on all fronts. Mostly you're asking for the scrapped fighter revamp changes back, which I was, am, and will be completely on board with.

Stabbath

05-04-2009, 10:27 PM

I'd like to see them make us a class that through aas could decide what role we are. Dps, or tank, or be mediocre at both. 3 general builds. Heck, maybe throw in a utility role. Too much for them to screw up tho probably./edit, sorry just noticed post above mine suggesting something similar it seems. I'm not really for the fighter revamp. At least what I've read about it.

circusgirl

05-04-2009, 11:44 PM

The fighter revamp was actually almost all positives for monks. It included big boosts to our defensive capabilities and AE aggro, along with small dps boosts. While some of the general ideas were bad, such as spell consolidation and the AE tank/ ST tank paradigm, the actual fixes there were fantastic and would have made us capable of tanking raid content appropriate to our guild's progressions (As opposed to now, when we can tank raid content only once we've already progressed past it and geared up from it).

Editedmind

05-05-2009, 10:49 AM

<cite>Vinka@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><ul><li>Up meditative healing to 40% (as was planned in the fighter revamp)</li><li>Remove the TSO Heal AA and add in a solid dps option</li><li>Move abilities around in the EoF AA lines to seperate tanking and dpsing abilities, forcing a brawler to choose which line they want to go down. </li></ul>Switch eagles fury (melee crit) with claw reversal (+deflection chance) to make the str line dps and the int line tanking based, and up the MC and DA to be equal to that obtained by plate tanks for equal AAs Make Eagle Shriek (int endline) a pure tanking abilityChange Crane Twirl to 40% AE autoattackCompletely redo the sta line into an aggro control line. This gives us str: dps (single-target), agi: reuse speed/utility, sta:tanking (aggro), wis: dps (AE), and str: tanking (survivability)<ul><li>Revamp the KoS endline AAs to have two solid tanking options and two solid dps options, but arrange the lines in such a way that it is difficult to get both.</li><li>De-nerf the monk raidwide</li><li>Give us a solid and unique utility role: Make all avoidance count as uncontested for tranquil vision (so it can be used in offensive stance effectively), or, alternatively, make it affect all fighters in a raid.</li><li>Get rid of strikethrough on raid mobs</li><li>Get rid of the aggro-lock immunities so that peel will work properly</li></ul><div>This requires a lot of work...but I think would basically fix the class completely if these things were implemented. </div></blockquote>I think it would be better if they switched the STR deflection chance out with the old 5% parry/riposte ability, I have no clear understanding of how deflection chance actually works but from what I can tell it doesn't seem that great. TSO fighter AA line has Riposte Mastery that increases the damage of such attacks, which would have worked nicer I think with the old KoS STR line AA. Other STR AA could use tweaking too, like preassure point seems to give a low debuff when compared to where the game is now, and neglible damage. I wish the DA was increased for the STR line, I miss how we could get almost 100% just through AA even if it was without a weapon.The STA and AGI line are more likely candidates for utility with some DPS as they are now. STA has a useful end line ability which is neat for PvE and great for PvP, the only problem is that it sucks when you actually compare it to other endline stuff and should be 100% critical, for all hits, for the full 10 second duration. That would of course require the devs to actually fix critical mitigation which seems like a long shot right now.INT really could be more of a tanking tree, the endline could or should really be buffed for it, the WIS line could up the AoE damage... Actually looking over these AA again I think switching out any DPS enhancing AA from any of the trees will just nerf our DPS so much more that it wouldn't be funny.The EoF tree just needs about 50% more AA choices, with endline AA that can actually be compared to those of other classes in terms of use and power. More AA choices in that tree would essentially force people to choose, rather than now where it's a bit of everything but you're going to get most of it anyway with 70 points even if you don't need or use the ability.The stances need to define their roles more clearly. Something like all out defense/tanking at the sake of DPS, all out DPS at the sake of defense, and somewhere inbetween which isn't a vast improvement to either but no negatives, and perhaps with a utility group buff added to it.For gear? Yep, there should be plenty of choice for either spec.I agree with most of the ideas, but I don't want to nerf monk needlessly just to make it seem a more viable change. Other hybrid classes don't seem forced to lock into specs either, so neither should we. I would rather they went with tweaking our AA's and abilities positively, like removing the 8 trigger count to our lightning palm, give haste a purpose heh, rather than nerfing the class to bring our DPS in line with our survivability which seems to be the current goal.

NamaeZero

05-05-2009, 05:03 PM

<ul><li>For Brawlers, Minimum Avoidance Chance should = Regular Avoidance Chance. No more mobs with attacks that get to ignore our primary defense out of hand or hit through Tsunami. </li><li>Adjust haste caps to be in line with the amount of haste you give out via itemization. </li><li>Fix broken AA's and AA's that don't do what they say on the box (e.g. Focused Followup). </li><li>Reorganize the entire Monk AA tree with 4 working, useful endline abilities *minimum.* </li><li>Give us a similar amount of AE autoattack, double attack, +crit in our AA's as other Fighters. </li><li>Give us something to make up for our lack of passive taunt aggro, especially when fighting multiple mobs. </li><li>Enhance: Heal and Mending Spirit AA should either stack, or one of them should be changed.</li></ul>

Lethe5683

05-05-2009, 09:19 PM

<cite>NamaeZero wrote:</cite><blockquote><ul><li>For Brawlers, Minimum Avoidance Chance should = Regular Avoidance Chance. No more mobs with attacks that get to ignore our primary defense out of hand or hit through Tsunami. </li></ul></blockquote>Maybe all deflection should = uncontested avoidance but if all avoidance for brawlers were uncontested they would have to lower our mit to like.. 20% which would simply make us end up in the same situation we are in now only more exaggerated.

circusgirl

05-05-2009, 09:37 PM

Deflection chance ups your uncontested avoidance, which makes that option great for raiders or folks fighting high level mobs, but not particularly good for soloers or anyone fighting even conned mobs.As far as the haste issue goes, I think the best answer to that is to change everburning into a flurry buff. It accomplishes the exact same result at the solo level (i.e. hitting the enemy more often) but allows us to take advantage of the haste buffs if we get a troub or illy in the group instead of immediately capping out.

Couching

05-06-2009, 01:33 AM

For adornment, we need 3% mitigation increase or 3% riposte adornment for crushing weapon. At the moment, adornments for crushing weapon suck very much.For aggro, peel needs a hotfix to be working on TSO raids. It's ridiculous that we even get peel focus as our TSO aa and it didn't work on tso raids.

circusgirl

05-06-2009, 11:06 AM

Peel is really a serious problem. What they did making everything immune to aggro lock is the equivalent of saying to paladins "Oh, amends doesn't work in raids" or to guardians "Oh, by the way, you can't use recapture anymore. kkthxbye."Its a serious problem that kills our desireability as a tank, and it seriously needs a fix.

NamaeZero

05-06-2009, 01:46 PM

<cite>Akodia@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>NamaeZero wrote:</cite><blockquote><ul><li>For Brawlers, Minimum Avoidance Chance should = Regular Avoidance Chance. No more mobs with attacks that get to ignore our primary defense out of hand or hit through Tsunami. </li></ul></blockquote>Maybe all deflection should = uncontested avoidance but if all avoidance for brawlers were uncontested they would have to lower our mit to like.. 20% which would simply make us end up in the same situation we are in now only more exaggerated.</blockquote>I'm not understanding why they would have to lower mitigation? Uncontested Avoidance = Normal Avoidance for Brawler just means that we tank the same way against epics as we do against group and solo. It seems a lot more consistant to me. Obviously, outside Avoidance buffs on Brawlers wouldn't get this special benefit, and would be contested as normal but I dislike the idea of anyone bypassing our primary defense automatically. That's something that should require a debuff at least. Give us a chance to resist it somehow!

Editedmind

05-06-2009, 01:55 PM

<cite>Vinka@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Deflection chance ups your uncontested avoidance, which makes that option great for raiders or folks fighting high level mobs, but not particularly good for soloers or anyone fighting even conned mobs.As far as the haste issue goes, I think the best answer to that is to change everburning into a flurry buff. It accomplishes the exact same result at the solo level (i.e. hitting the enemy more often) but allows us to take advantage of the haste buffs if we get a troub or illy in the group instead of immediately capping out.</blockquote>Meh. The reterming of all this stuff and adding new mechanics just obfuscates the purpose even more. I had thought the old defensive ability in the STR line was uncontested too since it was a % to parry/riposte. If all the future buffs to avoidance are going to be deflection then that seems like it's only going to diminish the mechanic of riposte even more.It would be funny if they actually changed Everburning into something completely different like an encounter AoE proc buff that does fire damage.

circusgirl

05-06-2009, 03:35 PM

I think the best fix for Everburning is to make it a chance to flurry instead of haste. It accomplishes the same benefit (hitting more often) without pushing us towards a cap.

Lethe5683

05-08-2009, 09:47 AM

<cite>NamaeZero wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Akodia@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>NamaeZero wrote:</cite><blockquote><ul><li>For Brawlers, Minimum Avoidance Chance should = Regular Avoidance Chance. No more mobs with attacks that get to ignore our primary defense out of hand or hit through Tsunami. </li></ul></blockquote>Maybe all deflection should = uncontested avoidance but if all avoidance for brawlers were uncontested they would have to lower our mit to like.. 20% which would simply make us end up in the same situation we are in now only more exaggerated.</blockquote>I'm not understanding why they would have to lower mitigation? Uncontested Avoidance = Normal Avoidance for Brawler just means that we tank the same way against epics as we do against group and solo. It seems a lot more consistant to me. Obviously, outside Avoidance buffs on Brawlers wouldn't get this special benefit, and would be contested as normal but I dislike the idea of anyone bypassing our primary defense automatically. That's something that should require a debuff at least. Give us a chance to resist it somehow!</blockquote>Because having that much uncontested avoidance would be overpowered.

Couching

05-08-2009, 11:11 AM

<cite>Akodia@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>NamaeZero wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Akodia@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>NamaeZero wrote:</cite><blockquote><ul><li>For Brawlers, Minimum Avoidance Chance should = Regular Avoidance Chance. No more mobs with attacks that get to ignore our primary defense out of hand or hit through Tsunami. </li></ul></blockquote>Maybe all deflection should = uncontested avoidance but if all avoidance for brawlers were uncontested they would have to lower our mit to like.. 20% which would simply make us end up in the same situation we are in now only more exaggerated.</blockquote>I'm not understanding why they would have to lower mitigation? Uncontested Avoidance = Normal Avoidance for Brawler just means that we tank the same way against epics as we do against group and solo. It seems a lot more consistant to me. Obviously, outside Avoidance buffs on Brawlers wouldn't get this special benefit, and would be contested as normal but I dislike the idea of anyone bypassing our primary defense automatically. That's something that should require a debuff at least. Give us a chance to resist it somehow!</blockquote>Because having that much uncontested avoidance would be overpowered.</blockquote>To be a viable tank, you can't be one or two shotted (mobs can double attack). The more hits you can stay alive, the better tank you are.80% uncontested avoidance + 40% mit <<< 60% uncontested avoidance + 60% mit in survivability for hard hitting mobs (usually epic mobs).It's a very bad idea to trade off mitigation for more uncontested avoidance. On the contrary, it's really easy for soe to fix brawler tanking; adding more gear, adornments with + mitigation increase for brawlers.

Lethe5683

05-08-2009, 11:30 AM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Akodia@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>NamaeZero wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Akodia@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>NamaeZero wrote:</cite><blockquote><ul><li>For Brawlers, Minimum Avoidance Chance should = Regular Avoidance Chance. No more mobs with attacks that get to ignore our primary defense out of hand or hit through Tsunami. </li></ul></blockquote>Maybe all deflection should = uncontested avoidance but if all avoidance for brawlers were uncontested they would have to lower our mit to like.. 20% which would simply make us end up in the same situation we are in now only more exaggerated.</blockquote>I'm not understanding why they would have to lower mitigation? Uncontested Avoidance = Normal Avoidance for Brawler just means that we tank the same way against epics as we do against group and solo. It seems a lot more consistant to me. Obviously, outside Avoidance buffs on Brawlers wouldn't get this special benefit, and would be contested as normal but I dislike the idea of anyone bypassing our primary defense automatically. That's something that should require a debuff at least. Give us a chance to resist it somehow!</blockquote>Because having that much uncontested avoidance would be overpowered.</blockquote>To be a viable tank, you can't be one or two shotted (mobs can double attack). The more hits you can stay alive, the better tank you are.80% uncontested avoidance + 40% mit <<< 60% uncontested avoidance + 60% mit in survivability for hard hitting mobs (usually epic mobs).It's a very bad idea to trade off mitigation for more uncontested avoidance. On the contrary, it's really easy for soe to fix brawler tanking; adding more gear, adornments with + mitigation increase for brawlers.</blockquote>All I was saying is that having 85%+ ubcontested avoidance would be incredibly op and would have to be compensated for in some way.

NamaeZero

05-08-2009, 12:19 PM

Mitigation is uncontested and no one complains about that, so I'm not seeing why uncontested avoidance is so incredibly OP by definition. Obviously, you'd look at the plate classes and take their average uncontested avoidance and multiply it by their mitigation to get a target number. The resulting number is what you should get when you multiply monk uncontested avoidance by mitigation. So if a plate tank has 60% mitigation and 60% uncontested avoidance with X tanking gear, then a monk with the same quality of tanking gear and 80% uncontested avoidance should have 45% mitigation. If we're allowed to get uber'ed up to 85% uncontested avoidance then 42% mitigation would more appropriate (given the example.)I think it's the whole deal with strikethrough on Avoidance that doesn't make sense to me. I can see how a monster could hit a plate tank so monstrously that it passes through armor, but how does it work where a monster misses but then hits anyway? What exactly are they striking through in that case?I'm also assuming that we get Meditative Healing back up to 40% to act as spike protection. Even balanced against plate tank defense, Avoidance is still slightly inferior to mitigation because it's vulnerablity to streaks.

Couching

05-08-2009, 01:04 PM

Morgane

05-08-2009, 01:33 PM

I was tanking in Chelsith last night for a guildie's Epic update and almost got one-shotted by a random Yah-lei heroic. I was in defensive stance and have T1 shard armor. Admittedly, my AA's are not set up for tanking but stilll... yeesh.

Wildfury77

05-08-2009, 09:07 PM

<cite>Morgane@Everfrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>I was tanking in Chelsith last night for a guildie's Epic update and almost got one-shotted by a random Yah-lei heroic. I was in defensive stance and have T1 shard armor. Admittedly, my AA's are not set up for tanking but stilll... yeesh.</blockquote>I'm in T2 shard armor + adorns with tanking AA + 90% master 1s. I have absolutely no trouble MTing "most" TSO zones. Just did Crucible 15mins ago for example.I don't understand why so many of u seem to struggle with tanking non-raid content?? Agro holding isn't that hard and survivability is good imho. I suppose I do play on Nagafen and therefore min-max more than most Bluebies but even so......For agro holding I strongly recommend taking Wisdom line right until the end. Master 1s in Taunts, Dragon stance and AOEs including our "bad breath" are a must. IF u taunt then AOE x2 and have Crane Flock as a back-up u can hold group agro in most circumstances. I can't imagine attempting multi-mob tanking without wisdom line.......And come on Chelsith?? All the RoK zones are ridiculously easy now. I have no idea how u got nearly 1 shotted in Chelsith. Maidens is now a 20-30min zone.....and Chelsith is much easier. On Nagafen Brawlers easily get multiple raid places, are accepted as effective tanks and effective DPS and devastating PvP toons. I remember my days on a PvE server, people don't quite push things to the limit and don't min-max in quite the same way. You won't see many lvl 80s on Nagafen that would dare set foot in the world without Full adorns, Full potions, Full Clickies, Maxed AAs, the BEST gear they can get ---> and they will know every trick and macro CAs, they will know about all the other classes buff,debuffs etc. I know this isn't the norm on PvE servers - there are good raiders and skilled players for sure but there is a lot of absolutely appalling rubbish too......When i see a PvP Monk (Not from Vox/Venekor as they really don't count) complain on this forum then I will accept the problem is as big as the whiners here claim. Up until then I'll continuing fighting freeps and watching my guild use 3 brawlers on TSO Raids /peace

Wildfury77

05-08-2009, 09:14 PM

Also 40% mitigation?? That seems very low.Even if you just had mitigation adorned T2 shard armor u should be >40%Add in mythical (fairly common these days) or if any of your healers/support grant +mitigation its not unusual to be sitting at >50% in a standard PUG!! my rough aim for a PUG would be about 80-85% avoidance 50+% mitigation and at least 15.5K HPs (usually higher).

Couching

05-08-2009, 10:29 PM

It is inappropriate to compare gaming experience on pvp and pve servers.It may be fine to have 3 brawlers in raids on pvp server since brawlers are great for pvp.However, it is absolutely stupid to have 3 brawlers for min/max raids on pve server.

Lethe5683

05-10-2009, 07:21 PM

<cite>NamaeZero wrote:</cite><blockquote>Mitigation is uncontested and no one complains about that, so I'm not seeing why uncontested avoidance is so incredibly OP by definition. Obviously, you'd look at the plate classes and take their average uncontested avoidance and multiply it by their mitigation to get a target number. The resulting number is what you should get when you multiply monk uncontested avoidance by mitigation. So if a plate tank has 60% mitigation and 60% uncontested avoidance with X tanking gear, then a monk with the same quality of tanking gear and 80% uncontested avoidance should have 45% mitigation. If we're allowed to get uber'ed up to 85% uncontested avoidance then 42% mitigation would more appropriate (given the example.)I think it's the whole deal with strikethrough on Avoidance that doesn't make sense to me. I can see how a monster could hit a plate tank so monstrously that it passes through armor, but how does it work where a monster misses but then hits anyway? What exactly are they striking through in that case?I'm also assuming that we get Meditative Healing back up to 40% to act as spike protection. Even balanced against plate tank defense, Avoidance is still slightly inferior to mitigation because it's vulnerablity to streaks.</blockquote>Plate tanks can't get anywhere near 60% uncontested avoidance. The point is however that plate tanks shouldn't have any where near as much avoidance in general as they do. There's a reason that mobs hit so hard, and it's because of the rediculous amounts of avoidance plate tanks are able to get while also having very high mitigation.

therodge

05-11-2009, 02:39 AM

<cite>NamaeZero wrote:</cite><blockquote>Mitigation is uncontested and no one complains about that, so I'm not seeing why uncontested avoidance is so incredibly OP by definition. Obviously, you'd look at the plate classes and take their average uncontested avoidance and multiply it by their mitigation to get a target number. The resulting number is what you should get when you multiply monk uncontested avoidance by mitigation. So if a plate tank has 60% mitigation and 60% uncontested avoidance with X tanking gear, then a monk with the same quality of tanking gear and 80% uncontested avoidance should have 45% mitigation. If we're allowed to get uber'ed up to 85% uncontested avoidance then 42% mitigation would more appropriate (given the example.)I think it's the whole deal with strikethrough on Avoidance that doesn't make sense to me. I can see how a monster could hit a plate tank so monstrously that it passes through armor, but how does it work where a monster misses but then hits anyway? What exactly are they striking through in that case?I'm also assuming that we get Meditative Healing back up to 40% to act as spike protection. Even balanced against plate tank defense, Avoidance is still slightly inferior to mitigation because it's vulnerablity to streaks.</blockquote>dont get me wrong brawlers need alot of help but innacurate information wont help your cause mitigation is contested

Dorieon

05-11-2009, 03:33 AM

<cite>therodge wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>NamaeZero wrote:</cite><blockquote>Mitigation is uncontested and no one complains about that, so I'm not seeing why uncontested avoidance is so incredibly OP by definition. Obviously, you'd look at the plate classes and take their average uncontested avoidance and multiply it by their mitigation to get a target number. The resulting number is what you should get when you multiply monk uncontested avoidance by mitigation. So if a plate tank has 60% mitigation and 60% uncontested avoidance with X tanking gear, then a monk with the same quality of tanking gear and 80% uncontested avoidance should have 45% mitigation. If we're allowed to get uber'ed up to 85% uncontested avoidance then 42% mitigation would more appropriate (given the example.)I think it's the whole deal with strikethrough on Avoidance that doesn't make sense to me. I can see how a monster could hit a plate tank so monstrously that it passes through armor, but how does it work where a monster misses but then hits anyway? What exactly are they striking through in that case?I'm also assuming that we get Meditative Healing back up to 40% to act as spike protection. Even balanced against plate tank defense, Avoidance is still slightly inferior to mitigation because it's vulnerablity to streaks.</blockquote>dont get me wrong brawlers need alot of help but innacurate information wont help your cause mitigation is contested</blockquote>Mitigation blocks the same % of damage regardless of the mob level. As in 65% mitigation will always mitigate the same % whether the mob is level 75 or 85. So yes, mitigation is uncontested.

Morgane

05-11-2009, 09:51 AM

<cite>Grondak@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>I'm in T2 shard armor + adorns with tanking AA + 90% master 1s. I have absolutely no trouble MTing "most" TSO zones. Just did Crucible 15mins ago for example.I don't understand why so many of u seem to struggle with tanking non-raid content?? Agro holding isn't that hard and survivability is good imho. I suppose I do play on Nagafen and therefore min-max more than most Bluebies but even so......For agro holding I strongly recommend taking Wisdom line right until the end. Master 1s in Taunts, Dragon stance and AOEs including our "bad breath" are a must. IF u taunt then AOE x2 and have Crane Flock as a back-up u can hold group agro in most circumstances. I can't imagine attempting multi-mob tanking without wisdom line.......And come on Chelsith?? All the RoK zones are ridiculously easy now. I have no idea how u got nearly 1 shotted in Chelsith. Maidens is now a 20-30min zone.....and Chelsith is much easier. On Nagafen Brawlers easily get multiple raid places, are accepted as effective tanks and effective DPS and devastating PvP toons. I remember my days on a PvE server, people don't quite push things to the limit and don't min-max in quite the same way. You won't see many lvl 80s on Nagafen that would dare set foot in the world without Full adorns, Full potions, Full Clickies, Maxed AAs, the BEST gear they can get ---> and they will know every trick and macro CAs, they will know about all the other classes buff,debuffs etc. I know this isn't the norm on PvE servers - there are good raiders and skilled players for sure but there is a lot of absolutely appalling rubbish too......When i see a PvP Monk (Not from Vox/Venekor as they really don't count) complain on this forum then I will accept the problem is as big as the whiners here claim. Up until then I'll continuing fighting freeps and watching my guild use 3 brawlers on TSO Raids /peace</blockquote>Well, I actually respec'd over the weekend using my dusty AA mirror and made two builds. With one I kept my current DPS setup and I created a new one for tanking. I ended up tanking a few shard runs in Deep Forge, Befallen and Miragul's and didn't do too bad with the tank setup. For AA's, I basically chose anything that had "parry" and "defense" in it and of course I maxed out points in my taunts. And I also grabbed whatever gear I had that had +defense (or is it deflection?).We have a really really well geared Pally in the guild and he almost always tanks so I've always been spec'd out for DPS. Since he recently got his Swashy up to 80 our small guild is in need of another tank. And in light of all the conversation here about Monks and their direction, I decided to give this tanking thing a try... hence the tank jobs this weekend. My fury healer said it was MUCH easier to keep me healed than the berserker who was with us but I think this is because our zerker just came back from a break and he doesn't have his shard armor yet, whereas I have my T1 set with adornments.So anyway... yeah, I see your point Grondak. Tanking isn't quite as difficult with my Monk as I thought it would be spec'd and geared for it properly, but I'm still ambivalent about some of the TSO instances. In the shard instances I still got hit pretty hard and I'm wondering how many tanking Monks have almost been one or two-shotted, which would be disaster for most groups, especially one without a class that could pick up aggro and survive long enough to rez the tank. Edited to add one last thought: [Removed for Content] with our taunts? Do we have no AoE taunts? Re-specc'd my taunts were pretty good and in emergencies there wasn't anything that Peel or Rescue couldn't handle but when fighting more than one mob I had to constantly cycle between mobs. I guess I"m not as uber as other Monks here but for me that was frigging difficult. Maybe I just need more practice.

Couching

05-11-2009, 12:44 PM

<cite>Dorieon@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>therodge wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>NamaeZero wrote:</cite><blockquote>Mitigation is uncontested and no one complains about that, so I'm not seeing why uncontested avoidance is so incredibly OP by definition. Obviously, you'd look at the plate classes and take their average uncontested avoidance and multiply it by their mitigation to get a target number. The resulting number is what you should get when you multiply monk uncontested avoidance by mitigation. So if a plate tank has 60% mitigation and 60% uncontested avoidance with X tanking gear, then a monk with the same quality of tanking gear and 80% uncontested avoidance should have 45% mitigation. If we're allowed to get uber'ed up to 85% uncontested avoidance then 42% mitigation would more appropriate (given the example.)I think it's the whole deal with strikethrough on Avoidance that doesn't make sense to me. I can see how a monster could hit a plate tank so monstrously that it passes through armor, but how does it work where a monster misses but then hits anyway? What exactly are they striking through in that case?I'm also assuming that we get Meditative Healing back up to 40% to act as spike protection. Even balanced against plate tank defense, Avoidance is still slightly inferior to mitigation because it's vulnerablity to streaks.</blockquote>dont get me wrong brawlers need alot of help but innacurate information wont help your cause mitigation is contested</blockquote>Mitigation blocks the same % of damage regardless of the mob level. As in 65% mitigation will always mitigate the same % whether the mob is level 75 or 85. So yes, mitigation is uncontested.</blockquote>No, mitigation is affected by mob level.It's more likely as block, only affected by mob level, and mitigation debuff from mobs.

Mattly

05-18-2009, 04:43 PM

/agree /signEQ2 is the closest mmo that designed monk animations with some decent martial arts animations so I would hate to see the class fall by the wayside.

Nulgara

05-19-2009, 02:21 PM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Dorieon@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>therodge wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>NamaeZero wrote:</cite><blockquote>Mitigation is uncontested and no one complains about that, so I'm not seeing why uncontested avoidance is so incredibly OP by definition. Obviously, you'd look at the plate classes and take their average uncontested avoidance and multiply it by their mitigation to get a target number. The resulting number is what you should get when you multiply monk uncontested avoidance by mitigation. So if a plate tank has 60% mitigation and 60% uncontested avoidance with X tanking gear, then a monk with the same quality of tanking gear and 80% uncontested avoidance should have 45% mitigation. If we're allowed to get uber'ed up to 85% uncontested avoidance then 42% mitigation would more appropriate (given the example.)I think it's the whole deal with strikethrough on Avoidance that doesn't make sense to me. I can see how a monster could hit a plate tank so monstrously that it passes through armor, but how does it work where a monster misses but then hits anyway? What exactly are they striking through in that case?I'm also assuming that we get Meditative Healing back up to 40% to act as spike protection. Even balanced against plate tank defense, Avoidance is still slightly inferior to mitigation because it's vulnerablity to streaks.</blockquote>dont get me wrong brawlers need alot of help but innacurate information wont help your cause mitigation is contested</blockquote>Mitigation blocks the same % of damage regardless of the mob level. As in 65% mitigation will always mitigate the same % whether the mob is level 75 or 85. So yes, mitigation is uncontested.</blockquote>No, mitigation is affected by mob level.It's more likely as block, only affected by mob level, and mitigation debuff from mobs. </blockquote>No, mitigation is NOT contested AT ALL. the only thing you see being affected by mob level compared to mitigation is your %. your mitigation does NOT go down or disappear when fighting a lvl 85 epic it stays EXACTLY the same and you use every single bit of it no matter what lvel the mob is. Did no one pay attention when they were leveling every single time you level if you dont upgrade gear your mit % goes down but the total mitiagtion number STAYS THE SAME. Mit is ABSOLUTELY NOT CONTESTED. Whens the last time you leveled a character and moused over your mit and it said your mitigation appears lower cause your skills arent maxed? oh thats right never. a Mit DEBUFF is the only thing that will actually lower your total mitigation.as far as everything else yes i still agree that strikethrough is the biggest hunk of crap ever thought up by a dev. someone at some point mentioned striking through mit. well thats the same thing and woudl jsut screw brawlers even more along with the rest of the tanks too. There is absolutely zero reason BRAWLER avoidance shoudlnt be uncontested in its entirety from self buffs and gear. if it unbalances survivability adjust the max self buffable avoidance a brawler can get its that frikin simple. balance is the goal in the end. and its laughably easy to test it.you create the exact same group vs teh exact same mob and use 1 of each tank and do the fight. rinse repeat count up totals for each tank and if the total dmg done to each tank is the same blam balance done. rinse and repeat for an assortment of different types of raid mobs. its the survivability that shoudl be balanced across the tanks. how each tank gets it can be vastly different and should be. destroy plate tank avoidance(a shield shoudl be their ONLY source of avoiding anything) if needed, make brawlers avoid uncontested if needed, get rid of strikethrough, adjsut plate tank mit to a point they can survive gow often they get hit adjsut brawler avoidance to the point they can survive the full blown hits they are gonna take. adjust the dmg the MOBS to balance the tanks not the dmg players do with spells and ca's its easy to add more hp to a mob if they are dieing to fast, easy to add cc elements ot a fight or power drains or mem wipes and stuff that requires a skilled group to beat, enough of this if you dont have this exact person standing in fornt of it your gonna get one shotted crap.anyway those are my thoughts on it.

BChizzle

05-19-2009, 03:33 PM

Having thoughts on something doesn't make it truth.

Nulgara

05-19-2009, 06:24 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Having thoughts on something doesn't make it truth.</blockquote>Oh by all means go ahead and attempt to prove me wrong then?

NamaeZero

05-19-2009, 07:03 PM

I think there is a disagreement here as to what is meant by uncontested. What I mean by mitigation being uncontested is that it always factors in when you take a hit. There's no monster (to my knowledge) that hits plate tanks through their armor and ignores the effects of mitigation (their primary defense.) On the other hand there are plenty of monsters that possess the ability to hit you automatically, especially when you're dealing with Strikethrough. This is an imbalance in the parity between mitigation and avoidance and it is one of the reasons Avoidance < Mitigation. The others include streaky attack rolls, weakened performance of damage shields/procs on Monks, and healing related problems.Brawlers need ways to compensate for this, such as:<ul><li>Easiest way: Scrap the idea of an avoidance tank altogether. Brawler leather armor adjusts to give them similar mitigation and avoidance values similar to what Plate tanks get. If you need a roleplay reason why Brawlers mitigate as much as a metal plate in leather, imagine that they flow with and control the force of the blows aimed at them and lower the damage by moving with it instead of using armor to soak the impact.</li><li>Adjust avoidance tanking to compensate for it's weaknesses. Perhaps brawlers get briefly harder to hit everytime they get hit, making streaks of multiple hits much harder to maintain. </li><li>Remove Strikethrough, or make Brawlers immune to it's effects. A Brawler should always get a chance to apply their primary defense against any standard melee or ranged attack, the same way the other Fighter's do. This also applies to melee based AoE's: If Mitigation applies to it, then so should Avoidance.</li><li>Heals, regens, vitae and wards should all give a slight avoidance bonus whenever their healing is expended but not needed. It should be even more noticable on wards and vitae since those all depend on being hit.</li></ul>

fre'do

05-21-2009, 02:51 PM

Well maybe the monks are fine in SOE eyes and that is why we get ignored. Too me this is the best class and nothing needs to be changed....just people minds...we can tank, we can solo, we can one hit stuff, we can play dead, we can hide, we can raid, we can taunt, we can heal, and we can dps. The next thing yall want for us is to cast a fireball since that is the only thing we cannot do...well i guess a the fist is like that. If the predators dont do there best attacks quickly, if the warlocks dont do go over board...we can do stuff...but most people just go all out and wonder why they die and we cannot keep agro.The issue is we are not Metal tanks...so healin us is completely different then them. We have spurts where we dont get hit and we have ones where we get hit alot. We should not be compared to the metal tanks because we are just different, we should be compared to monks and bruisers. As for avoidance we have much better avoidance then the plate tanks...because there avoidance from the shields is from the front only while ours is from all sides.I group with a fury and we work well togather. When we get into bigger groups and i am the tank I know i will be fine because she knows how to heal me. We been groupin since we were in our 30's. She knows the monk class well and i know the fury class well. Then i used to group with a different fury and we would always die because he didnt know how to heal a monk. Lets see I have tanked a Epic once when 2 groups of the raid was dead and my group lived because of group feign death. She was in my group and started bringin back the other priest to get people up...and someone flirted with a epic and since i was the only tank i did my job. I survived the whole fight and had the metal tank as backup. It was great healin by everyone and noone freaked out.