Curse

byteme! · Sep 29, 2006, 06:06 AM // 06:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by sinican

and you are a crappy monk... Tai plays better than you...

there is no room for people who don't play well with others in this game... its sick that people would invite you to a party because your a monk and think you would act like a healer but instead to get a big smack in the face from you dictating what happens to the group

they may as well eliminate the monk class completely so players like myself dont waste the spot on our groups where a henchi would fit much better

So it makes more sense to you that I should run off chasing a lone warrior to save him from near death away from the rest of my team? Why shouldn't I refuse to heal him? If an Ele runs into aggro and attempts to tank even after being told our heals are being exhausted thus rendering us unable to heal the rest of the team because we're focusing unneccesary attention on 1 target should I continue to heal him then? (and yes it does happen in PvE since not everyone is a pro infuser or what not to counter spikes) I'm not arrogant and no I'm not high and mighty because I use a monk. In fact I have 6 characters and been playing for a good 13 months now. So yes I can speak on both sides. Playing my Ele I would not tank in my party because I know what it's like to be the monk. I would not run away trying to take everything out on my own when I'm on my warrior. I would not be overzealous with my necro sacrificing my hp constantly with disregard to my monks energy. Even if the monks I play with are perfectly capable of handling any sort of damage I would not make life harder for them. I will help them help me.

I play very well with others. They know what to expect of me and they should know what I expect from them. It's a team game I already know that thank you very much.

Shadow of Light · Sep 29, 2006, 06:13 AM // 06:13

I don't try to control the team when I monk. I'm there as support, not to lead. I will ping my energy to warn party members if a situation's getting too hot, or I need a rest before continuing. If someone runs on ahead, or in a different direction, I won't be abandoning the rest of the team to go and heal him. I heal those who I can reach and communicate with the team whenever possible.

There are very few instances when I've been provoked to a point that I won't heal an individual. There's only one case I remember in which I simply stopped following a party half-way through a mission and felt smug when they all got killed near the end. Only a couple of times when I've refused to res fallen party members, and advised others not to res them either (either because they're leeching, or have been a general nuisance for most of the quest, or are deliberately endangering the rest of the party...). I will not abandon an entire team because of one or two idiots.

I've been very fortunate in my monking experiences.

I don't recall any abuse to my abilities, but have received many compliments on them. I am a good healer, if I can say that without sounding arrogant. I find monking a rewarding experience, but have some problems with the mentality that groups ALWAYS need a dedicated healer/protection monk for EVERY mission. Preferably two. If a team plays sensibly, works together and uses appropriate skills, the *need* for second-party healing can be greatly reduced. Have you ever monked for a team that never/rarely seems to need healing? It's like you're the safety net, instead of the hinge-upon-which-the-doom-of-the-team-hangs.

I recently took my elementalist through the last two Ring of Fire missions with a PUG. We couldn't find a monk for the second last mission, so we took a henchie and got through easily. We were so pleased with ourselves that we all agreed to do the last mission together. There was a PUG monk hanging around, so we replaced the henchie with her. At first we didn't do too well and there were several deaths. The only skills I remember our new monk using was Heal Party, Heaven's Delight and Rebirth--the latter of which she'd repeatedly use even in the middle of a heated battle. The little monk inside me cringed at this, and when I pointed out what she was doing in teamchat I got a 'STFU' from her. Wow. Ok... Happily, the team still got through the mission, despite losing our necro to an err7 half way through.

cataphract · Sep 29, 2006, 06:14 AM // 06:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rera

If you're 'trying out' infuser you should do it with a guild team, and make sure everyone knows you're not experienced. For serious HA teams, the infuser *must* be good, period.

Infuser is an extreme example, because good infusing is *hard*, and incompetence is extremely visible. The fact that it's easily one of the most critical positions on the team doesn't help either. If you were playing any other kind of monk the team probably wouldn't be quite as harsh.

OR you can just say "why don't you infuse and I'll wave my axe around without interrupting the enemy spikes"?

Kali Magdalene · Sep 29, 2006, 06:19 AM // 06:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by sinican

and you are a crappy monk... Tai plays better than you...

there is no room for people who don't play well with others in this game... its sick that people would invite you to a party because your a monk and think you would act like a healer but instead to get a big smack in the face from you dictating what happens to the group

they may as well eliminate the monk class completely so players like myself dont waste the spot on our groups where a henchi would fit much better

You should perhaps try playing a monk... Do PUGs, don't hench. Play all the missions in both campaigns.

I'm serious. PUG everything. You might learn a thing or two - like just how effective the henchmonks really are compared to human players and what kind of treatment people like to shower upon monks.

labsenpai · Sep 29, 2006, 06:27 AM // 06:27

Psychological tricks? Hmmm...

Player A: "Hey Healbot, what elite are you using?"
Healbot: "I brought Unyielding Aura, why do you ask?"

I'm suprised by what can test a PuGs mettle. Although most of the time I'm just encouraging everyone to finish the mission/goal.

Master Fuhon · Sep 29, 2006, 07:17 AM // 07:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by saphir

Unfortunately everyone seems to be focusing on the omg, those monks AREN'T healing when they could have aspect of this.

But the CONVERSE is also true! It's exactly the same tactic and reasoning behind it, but to hopefully elicit a different effect from a player.

My confusion was here. This statement makes no sense. The CONVERSE (from using the context of the way it was written) would state:

Everyone seems not to be focusing on the omg, those monks AREN'T healing when they could have.

Both of these statements being true would be a contradiction. Your previous two response in that post were also vague and gave no indication of a side. So I followed by making an interpretation of your story. And I also believe you have a problem understanding what I said.

Quote:

Originally Posted by saphir

(I would not let him die - added for the benefit of Master Fuhon as I wonder if he read beyond this sentence).

I'd let the necro die, if I had the ability to process information in a split second (including knowing what skills everyone was using to cause the loss of aggro). I referenced the necro being killed "properly" in two hits. The necro surviving (long or short term) leads to a loss of energy group wipe. I'd heal him, because I'm human, and I make mistakes. And because my primary role as a monk is to heal first, think second. My reflexes react to seeing 3 mobs jump on him, and I don't think for a second that anyone is to blame. Then I realize that the game runs based on cold, calculated logic. People make mistakes and the mobs react to them (although mobs have godly interruption skills).

Quote:

Originally Posted by saphir

you just can't win lol .

Don't waver to a point where you agree with both sides unless you plan on being a bad politician. I look through a person making a response to win favor, to see whether or not they really agree with points being made. Make it clear whether or not you are heal-botting or using psychology while monking; that's what this thread is all about.

bele · Sep 29, 2006, 07:19 AM // 07:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by byteme!

"I refuse to heal anyone who runs off on their own"
"I refuse to heal anyone attempts to tank unless they are w/*"

First things I would tell my teammates

I'll try to heal anyone depending on my prioritys. Sad you, fellow monk, are my first one. Oh well ....

I'll try to do my best and don't spam orders to ppl that probably know more than me, or just have made a mistake and know they have done one.

I'll try to be positive to my group and help and enforce the morale, esp. when someone dies,leaves or Err7

My fellow pug-ers are NOT MY HENCH. Good that heroes are comming in NF

I can stop healing someone, but just only if they drain my energy too much and risk the whole party.

Darakus · Sep 29, 2006, 08:15 AM // 08:15

As a monk my priority is the survival of the group which means I will heal everyone as long as the action is not putting global survival into jeopardy.

For example :

- A player stays into a damage over time area despite the fact it is not needed for him to do so -> I will heal that player as long as I can afford to, once the mana I use on him becomes more useful elsewhere I will stop.

- A player overextends and aggros several mobs doing so -> if the group of mob is manageable I will do my utmost to keep that player alive, if it isn't the case I will cut any healing from him because his dying while the group is still out of the mob's range is the best solution in some cases.

- The fighter equipping a vampiric weapon doesn't listen to a warning -> he will see his health decrease to around 50% before he is healed because it makes for optimum healing as no point of health regained is lost and this as long as I can afford it.

Don't misunderstand, I see myself as a ressource too and there will be cases where my survival in a retreat is seen as non optimal compared to the survival of several other members of the party in which case I will sacrifice myself.

The end result is that for the sake of the party surviving I adopt some of the behaviours mentionned here as being linked to psychological monking which leads me to believe the best methods are the same for everyone but the ideas behind their use might be different.

Does it really matter ? I don't believe so as long as your goal is the good of your party and not an illusion of power over it

Rera · Sep 29, 2006, 08:20 AM // 08:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by cataphract

OR you can just say "why don't you infuse and I'll wave my axe around without interrupting the enemy spikes"?

Well, he wanted to try infusing, and you don't do that by waving around an axe. I was just saying that infusing is a bad example, and that I'm not surprised at his team's reaction.

If every spike could be shut down easily, nobody would need infusers. Maybe that's true at super high-level PvP, but in the r9+ groups I play with, I don't see that happening :P.

sinican · Sep 29, 2006, 12:34 PM // 12:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by bele

I'll try to heal anyone depending on my prioritys. Sad you, fellow monk, are my first one. Oh well ....

I'll try to do my best and don't spam orders to ppl that probably know more than me, or just have made a mistake and know they have done one.

I'll try to be positive to my group and help and enforce the morale, esp. when someone dies,leaves or Err7

My fellow pug-ers are NOT MY HENCH. Good that heroes are comming in NF

I can stop healing someone, but just only if they drain my energy too much and risk the whole party.

good for you!

you my friend would make a wonderfull addition to any party...

you dont "refuse" to heal people, you know your limits and you aren't trying to make a point... you do what is in your capabilities and know that sometimes people make mistakes...

Crowlley · Sep 29, 2006, 01:12 PM // 13:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by sinican

there is no room for people who don't play well with others in this game

At last, someone actually gets the point of what most of the monks are saying!
And in my experience, its not groups what fail and moan. Its the occasional bad player(s) what get themselves killed despite trying to heal them and then moan that the monks aren't doing thier jobs.

EDIT-> just something about monks 'ordering others'. Whats wrong with a monk (the only player who has to worry about damage TAKEN) telling the warrior that using frenzy doubles the damage taken, which in turn doubles the healing needed, which in turn doubles the energy used, which in turn means that the monk has to take double the energy breaks, which in turn makes everything longer etc ( I know, I know, its all approximately and the monk must actually be pretty poor to need lots of breaks for energy regen).

King's Spectre · Sep 29, 2006, 01:18 PM // 13:18

Other than verbal abuse, I never see a good reason to leave a party. Period. If I leave a party, I am of *less* use to them than a henchie healer which is pathetic.

I try to be understanding of other's builds. Tanking ele? Bad. Ele that throws on armor of earth before running up to fire off a phoenix? Not so bad.

NinjaKai · Sep 29, 2006, 03:13 PM // 15:13

I generally monk in a 1.5 aggro circle. If they runoutside of that tough luck. I shouldn't have to exuast my energy casting protection spells on a single target who goes and gets themselves killed.

Kali Magdalene · Sep 29, 2006, 05:45 PM // 17:45

Edit: This is a longer response similar to one I lost to a crash last night. My earlier advice still stands, though: Try monking for bad PUGs before insisting it should be done with a smile.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sinican

you know the counter to all this....

if you really trully were a good monk you could compensate for bad players...

Turning it around: If you were truly a good player, you could compensate for bad monks. Why should the onus for compensating lie on the monk's shoulders?

Quote:

hell if the henchmen can do it why the heck cant any of you....

you all complain about this and that about how this player is playing wrong... yet henchis don't have a problem keeping people alive...

They can't. Oh, they don't complain or ping when they're low on energy, or stop healing someone because that someone is a constant energy drain. That doesn't make them better than a human monk, although it may make them a better choice for bad players.

Henchmen can and do have a problem keeping people alive.

Quote:

ive grown real fond of the henchi monks vs real monks... some of you have gone way overboard with this we need you crap... and not doing what even the AI can do and really what most players want outa a real monk vs an npc monk is to stay alive yourself and res dead members at more tacticle times...

its sad when half of you cant live up to even a henchi monk and all you want to do is blame the other players...

If you're a tanking warrior, and you're holding all the aggro, you get angry when the monk doesn't heal you in time to save you, right? Why should a monk sit back and let it pass in a similar situation where the tanking warrior pops frenzy and healing signet while the monk is trying to keep him up?

Quote:

I already know not to take any player monks cept in missions that require the healing of non grouped players such as hatchery and other escort missions... otherwise once again you moaning groaning high and mighty monkeys are second to Tai and her crew...

keep on blaming everyone else because you cant live up to your own roles... even a shitty group can prosper with a decent healer...

I sure as hell dont need to put up with any of this bull shit from you monks in my groups... pull your stupid little games on me and see who gets the boot...

Well, if you feel that henchmen can keep bad players standing, and you use them by preference, I can see why monks wouldn't enjoy teaming with you.

Rera · Sep 29, 2006, 06:27 PM // 18:27

The argument here is strange. Many of you seem to be insisting that monks, specifically, should be forced to put up with whatever the group throws at them, just because it's their job. I find this to be a patently ludicrous claim. If no other class has to put up with bull****, why should monks? It doesn't matter what class I play - display enough idiocy and I ragequit. I don't have time to **** around with morons. However, few people care when a warrior rages (who cares, it's just a warrior), but when a monk starts witholding heals, everyone is suddenly in uproar.

My original theory still stands. I think most of you target monks specifically because monks are in a unique position to enforce their demands. I further think that many of you have been the victims of this kind of 'psychological monking' and it pisses you off that someone else is able to control how you play the game. You don't care when it's some warrior telling you what to do, because you can just ignore him. But you *can't* ignore your monks, and that really irritates you.

As for being less use than a hench monk - if your definition of a good monk is one that will put up with whatever moronic **** you get yourself into, then by all means, please take the henchmen. Monks aren't there to serve you or do you favors. Piss them off, and they'll rage just like anyone else.

saphir · Sep 29, 2006, 06:48 PM // 18:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Master Fuhon

My confusion was here. This statement makes no sense. The CONVERSE (from using the context of the way it was written) would state:

Everyone seems not to be focusing on the omg, those monks AREN'T healing when they could have.

Both of these statements being true would be a contradiction. Your previous two response in that post were also vague and gave no indication of a side. So I followed by making an interpretation of your story. And I also believe you have a problem understanding what I said.

I'd let the necro die, if I had the ability to process information in a split second (including knowing what skills everyone was using to cause the loss of aggro). I referenced the necro being killed "properly" in two hits. The necro surviving (long or short term) leads to a loss of energy group wipe. I'd heal him, because I'm human, and I make mistakes. And because my primary role as a monk is to heal first, think second. My reflexes react to seeing 3 mobs jump on him, and I don't think for a second that anyone is to blame. Then I realize that the game runs based on cold, calculated logic. People make mistakes and the mobs react to them (although mobs have godly interruption skills).

Ah, I see, that's what I get for not proofreading my posts heh. Well, all I wanted to say was that the opposite of what everyone seems to be focusing on (lack of healing in order to conserve energy and to encourage the said player to move out of aoe/stay back/stay safer) is also true. There are times when you want to treat a caster as you would a tank in order keep him from not moving and losing the current agro despite him being a larger energy sink. Because the alternative would be worse w/ hard hitting mobs. Not as much of a problem w/ things like skeletal beserkers though.

But everything is always dependent on current energy levels of course and priorities.

Quote:

Don't waver to a point where you agree with both sides unless you plan on being a bad politician. I look through a person making a response to win favor, to see whether or not they really agree with points being made. Make it clear whether or not you are heal-botting or using psychology while monking; that's what this thread is all about.

Eh, I guess I wasn't being clear enough then. I'm not sure what a "heal bot" is.. one who just automatically responds w/ a heal to any hp drop? Since I made the OP, I hope I know what I at least wanted this thread to be about lol.

Anyway, the "psychology" I use while monking is not to completely withhold heals or to use it as a "carrot and stick" to force my teammates to do what I want. It's a strategy rather like managing energy, you try to manage the group's aggro because it directly affects my healing and protection effectiveness as a monk. Just as the damage dealers manage aggro and against the mobs - eg. ranger kiting and pulling tight group into traps, or using traps/pbaoe to for the mobs away from the casters, or whacking on a beast as a war to get it's attention on you and off the backlines. It's the same thing, except monks manage healing on the team, except being actual human players their actions based on your heals are not as predictable as the game AI.

TadaceAce · Sep 29, 2006, 07:25 PM // 19:25

The story ends like this. Good players opt for henchy monks anyway... the only time good players play with pug monks is when the rest of the group doesn't want henchies. With the release of Nightfall, good players become non-existant in pug groups because of their ability to make good heroes.

Monks, your pug groups are going from bad to worse.

MelechRic · Sep 29, 2006, 07:26 PM // 19:26

I've only read the OP's post, but this is what I do:

1. Verbal warning via chat if to alert the player to their problematic playstyle.
2. After the warning this player is de-prioritized from the healing queue.
3. Continued unwanted behavior (ie aggroing too much, running off) will result in me letting you die and not attempting to rez you even after the battle is complete.

If people don't like it then they're free to take a hench monk that does have a faster reaction time than I do, but does not always heal the right target/remove dangerous hexes/avoid aggro.

Myria · Sep 29, 2006, 07:41 PM // 19:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rera

The argument here is strange. Many of you seem to be insisting that monks, specifically, should be forced to put up with whatever the group throws at them, just because it's their job.

I would suggest looking up the term "straw man". No one, not one single individual, has suggested that monks should have to put up with anything and everything. What has been suggested is that it is not the place of the monk, or any other player, to be group dictator and determine how everyone else should play... OR ELSE.

Quote:

However, few people care when a warrior rages (who cares, it's just a warrior), but when a monk starts witholding heals, everyone is suddenly in uproar.

A warrior raging and a monk refusing to fulfill their fundamental role in a group are two different things. This would be more akin to a warrior who decides they won't tank or, perhaps even closer, decides to draw agro on themselves and run in circles around the monk, claiming they are trying to teach the monk how to play.

Quote:

My original theory still stands. I think most of you target monks specifically because monks are in a unique position to enforce their demands. I further think that many of you have been the victims of this kind of 'psychological monking' and it pisses you off that someone else is able to control how you play the game.

For myself, you can be assured this is not the case. In well over a year of playing I have never partied with a human monk. In point of fact I only ever party with a couple of close friends, otherwise I hench. The reason for that being that I read way too many threads like this one back when I first started playing.

Quote:

As for being less use than a hench monk - if your definition of a good monk is one that will put up with whatever moronic **** you get yourself into, then by all means, please take the henchmen.

My definition of a good monk is one that keeps me alive through every mission in the game, not to mention Grandmaster Cartographer titles. Henchie monks have done that for me, sans the Napoleon complex, so in my book they're pretty darn decent.

Master Fuhon · Sep 29, 2006, 08:22 PM // 20:22

I like the analogy of a monk being the group psychologist. Sometimes he gets a skilled group, and ends up getting a free ride through the mission. Most of the time, he gets players that he has to carry through a mission for them to make it. What we end up with is a group of players who have not progressed to the proper skill level sitting around trying to complete end-game instances. That's what heal-botting is; doing what your job is supposed to be without thinking of the consequences. As long as you get called a good monk.

Quote:

Originally Posted by saphir

Anyway, the "psychology" I use while monking is not to completely withhold heals or to use it as a "carrot and stick" to force my teammates to do what I want.

I'm not surprised someone would find my perspective offensive, but it's similar to yours. When I monk, I start by topping off players with heals. When things get hectic, I maintain a health buffer so that no character can die in the amount of time it takes me to react. At certain points in missions, every heal I cast on a character is preventing an immediate death.

Quote:

Originally Posted by saphir

While not healing someone at all and letting them die (and I HATE letting anyone die on my watch) is pretty obvious, something a bit more subtle is to not fully heal casters who tend to rush in, tank mobs, or have high dp. These are the party members you least want the mobs focusing on, so keeping them at less than fully healed, or just to heal them a bit slower often discourages such behavior.

There is a such thing, as finding out that people react causally to certain situations, and using these tendencies to get the player to do the right thing. The player does the right thing, because you have tricked him into doing it. He will not know any better this time or the next. I understand that my behavior borders on crossing this line.

I let him die. He sits with the death penalty. Either he has been engaging in the process of purposely tanking the PuG (so his accumulation of death penalty makes him an easier threat to manage), or he is a human being capable of learning from his mistakes. I give him some advice "Stay back and work off the DP". His original behavior harms the team, but the more times he engages in it, the less chance he has to screw everyone else over because there is an associated consequence. I then heal him as I would a good player until his behavior once again threatens the whole team. Well, I did give this character a death, and you may think that this is the most extreme consequence of a situation. No questions about it, I'll let him know the mistake he made after he dies: "If you aggro, you better be able to tank it".

I don't know anything about the process of manipulating a player's health levels to force behavior much beyond giving them DP. I also don't let my anger get in the way of keeping someone alive, after they try to challenge me. Leaving a caster under fire at low health isn't something I'd ever consider. I let you drop when you become a liability because some groups of 6 are better than a group of 8. After that, people are free to rage quit, curse at me, or to play smarter. I like them being aware of what I'm doing, because it doesn't help them in any way if they don't know whats going on.

Like someone else has already mentioned, groups trust you to keep them alive. I trust them not to make the group fail the mission. I want the communication channels to be open so that players know what is going on. I'd rather give someone a death on purpose, than have a death happen by accident from something I was doing deliberately. Because either way the group needs to know.