Curse

bhavv · Apr 09, 2007, 01:44 PM // 13:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZenRgy

Oh yeah, another point I'd like to raise.

Mo/Me has the advantage of bringing [skill]Auspicious Incantation[/skill] which doesn't totally blow and works well with Aegis now.

Note : Skill has a much lower recharge penalty than stated.

With 6 points invested into channeling, Auspicious incantation still adds 8 seconds to skill recharge. That means aegis between two prot monks is going to be down for a furthur 16 seconds, and 16 seconds with no aegis can get you killed.

You could put more points in channeling, but then you have to reduce your monk skills. With Gole, you can keep Aegis up for 13 seconds per prot monk, and with the 2 second cast time it will be up all the time except while casting and if its interupted/shattered. Also, you dont need to waste skill points in channeling.

Gole is still the best option for chaining aegis, channeling on the infuser.

matti90 · Apr 09, 2007, 02:06 PM // 14:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by kosh

you didnt come here to ask what is better, you posted your thread to say this: all monks that use Gole suck, im leet im using channeling.

That pretty much sums up what the thread has been about.

On the debate itself, bhavv wrote my exact thoughts:

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhavv

Gole is still the best option for chaining aegis, channeling on the infuser

Lorekeeper · Apr 09, 2007, 02:47 PM // 14:47

aegis meh

find a monk backline who can keep a team alive without relying on aegis chains and you are set for life imo.

in gvg aegis is becoming a wasted skill, since most mesmers are bringing the 15 energy mirror of disenchant.... LOVE that skill now.

i really discourage a reliance on aegis. If i join a team in HA who demands aegis chains i know the team is not going to get very far. Because they are the sorts of monks who will die unless they have aegis... which is stupid. Guardian anyone? 2 second recharge able to prot any ally being attacked by melee? para or ranger spike? pre prot with guardian imo... interrupt a ranger or necro imo... interrupt enchant removal imo... infuse the spike imo...
only time i ever enjoy the benefits of party wide 50% block is king of the hill HOH and Kill count. But im not dedicated my monk bars to such a tiny proportion of the HA map rotation.

this is quite frustrating. reading this thread when all i see are people who believe that there is only one way to monk.

i have the same philosophy when it comes down to playing warrior.

if you can run a warrior build that kills people it really doesnt matter what specific skills you run. Of course utility like interrupts and snares is team build dependant.

Same with monk bars... you have a job to either mitigate or heal damage, run a bar that lets you do that job and i dont see why anyone has any right to make you run anything else.

this is a game about the players and the team, i can monk so much better with channeling than i can with gole, the habits ive developed with channeling, allowing me to spam to high heaven and piss off enemy teams by dancing around them while staying alive, i just wouldnt be able to do that with Gole. And in HA i can do wat i do with channeling because me and my monks make it work.

ofc in gvg i would never dream of pulling the stunts i pull in HA, but then again, monking in GvG is a very different kettle of fish. I hope you all can distinguish between the two.

that said, if you are a monk who would like to make the transition from HA monking to GvG monking i would not develop a reliance on channeling monking, i would suggest you get used to Gole since that tends to be the skill of choice atm. But who knows what the future may bring.

Auspicious incantation ftw.

bhavv · Apr 09, 2007, 03:11 PM // 15:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lorekeeper

aegis meh

find a monk backline who can keep a team alive without relying on aegis chains and you are set for life imo.

I hope that post was a joke. You may as well be saying find a monk backline that can keep a team alive without infuse health.

It is possible, but when you end up facing a thump or para spike team, Aegis mitigates so much damage it makes a huge difference.

My team actually alternates between two backlines, either aegis chain with an SoR prot and divert, or no aegis chain with an SoD. We found that removing aegis even with SoD results in the team being ganked and pressured a lot more, mostly because a lot of teams use several warriors or thumpers to target different monks.

Another part where aegis is handy is when repositioning on kill count maps. Putting it up before running comes in very handy.

Aegis is in no way 100% required, but the amount of damage reduced by it makes it a very nice skill to use.

Nilator · Apr 09, 2007, 03:17 PM // 15:17

Channeling, no doubt, takes the cake now. GoLE is almost useless to non primary elementalists after the nerfs.

Konqq · Apr 09, 2007, 04:37 PM // 16:37

If you *manage your energy* before the aegis, you will definetely get better results from channeling. Also, the fact is, you can't really have a true backline in HA. Your warriors are bashing their monks who are trying to stay at their back. Your monk are trying to stay within range of the warriors so they can heal them. Altogether it tends to make a big mass of organized chaos (excuse the oxymoron).

I would guess that the aegis reliance with GOLE came about with the paragon spike prevelance. Can't get in close to that to use channeling, but need aegis or you die. Paragon spike isn't nearly so common anymore, and teams with dervishes, thumpers, and assassins are the norm.

When you're talking about fighting thumpers, how can you possibly support GOLE? I have full energy the entire match with channeling. You've got thumpers in your backline + pet = 2 energy per thumper. Add to that the fact that there can be 2 or 3 of em, and other characters that you are/should be kiting through, and you've got more than enough energy for aegis. All your GOLE is doing in that match is telling the thumper "Get ready to KD me, aegis coming up. Better run up now." GOLE and aegis simply cannot match up against channeling against a melee build.

But wait... thats where aegis helps.

Oh sure you can argue that it helps on a ranger spike or para spike still.

Just preprot, get a decent infuser. R spikes are rarely clean anymore even with a drain. (I've faced a few)

Point is that in the long run, channeling should be more effective whether you're running aegis or not. Just get some prot monks who know how to keep 15 energy on their bar instead of 5 for casting aegis.

Nadia Roark · Apr 09, 2007, 05:17 PM // 17:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gimme Money Plzkthx

You also have to run 10e skills to take full advantage of glyph, or 15e skills before the nerf... I think (and thought before the nerf) that channeling is better,

I have to stop here for a minute to point something out and ask you a question. Someone had already (previous to this post) and someone else probably has since pointed out that part of the appeal for GoLE was that it didn't require you to stand in the middle of a cluster of enemies. With the prevalance of AoE damage and the growing emphasis on mobility, channeling had fallen by the wayside; and those were good reasons for it having done so.

And now for my question: if you thought channeling was better pre-nerf, do you play monk? I've not met many people (who knew what they were doing) that shared this opinion. It might depend on the monk's role, since Glyph struck me as more useful on prot bars than on healer's bars.

Quote:

I just want some insight as to why people even THINK GoLE is better, even though whatever people say won't change my mind. Coincidentally, every single monk I've seen that runs glyph sucks and/or their team drops super fast, depending on how many monks on that team run it.

I don't think anyone thinks it's better now, and if you're seeing teams drop super fast its because Izzy and the devs have been shitting all over monks since factions. With the GoLE nerf it's obvious to me that we probably have no choice but to return to channeling, and given the aforementioned frequency of AoE spam (not to mention the decathalons we know as Kill Counts) it's obvious that ANet wants to see us monks taking dirt naps.

Why they keep discouraging a traditional monk backline, while promoting (or at the very least allowing) imba gimmicks like SR abuse is a constant source of irritation. Why they keep shitting on monks and mesmers is beyond me, and I find it doubly confusing since I consider them the two hardest classes to play. Apparently, we're not allowed to have an energy management mechanic that's even 10% as good as SR.

God Apprentice · Apr 09, 2007, 05:35 PM // 17:35

<3 for Nadia. Even with the change to Soul Reaping N/Rt and N/Mo backlines are still common. Anyone ever thought of using Rits as healers?

ksalanpang · Apr 09, 2007, 05:54 PM // 17:54

Depends on the monk build that you're playing. Nowadays, everyone runs aegis chain. GoLe is an easy way to reduce the amount of energy you consume in a matter of few seconds versus channeling you gain limited amount of energy even the whole team surrounds you (1 team vs 1 team suitation). What I see in HA is, there's less and less people running warder = more mobility for monks to kite. Most of the time it's safer to stay out of the enemy, from that you don't get the full advantage of channeling. However, it also depend upon the build monks are running.

Channeling was better imo on alter capping maps (HA).

Thomas.knbk · Apr 09, 2007, 07:24 PM // 19:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lorekeeper

Guardian anyone? 2 second recharge able to prot any ally being attacked by melee? para or ranger spike? pre prot with guardian imo...

Preprotting with a 1 sec cast spell is ftl against spikes imo.

Lorekeeper · Apr 09, 2007, 08:07 PM // 20:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomas.knbk

Preprotting with a 1 sec cast spell is ftl against spikes imo.

im not going to waste my time explaining what 'preprotting' means to this guy, someone else do it.

I once ran a aura of faith prot in HA. I didnt tell my friends i was running it, i like to run suprise bars to keep things fun and fresh, i get bored of running fotm over and over, like alot you seem to. We won... and won... and won... and won HOH. And held... and held... i like playing with people who come to trust my abilities and my judgement, so when i say... guys i have a suprise bar this run... they dont whine and complain about me not taking FOTM yawnway skills. If you wanna play this game only using a handful of the skills fine by me, buts its ignorant to outrule other skills because YOU havent found a way to make them work.

im done with this thread. If you cannot accept the possibility that some players are able to run unique skills and STILL do their job.... often better than you can, then there really is no room for discussion. This is not a place for saying XXX does not work. This is a discussion about WHY in your PERSONAL experience YOU like to run channeling/gole. It is an ENTIRELY different matter to then tell people they should do the same as you do.

gosh and not knowing what preprotting is...

thought this thread would encourage some good discussion, back to waiting for another promising one to come along.

lorekeeper

TheOneMephisto · Apr 09, 2007, 08:50 PM // 20:50

We've already been through the relative disadvantages and advantages, and this thread is just devolving into flaming.

GoLE:
+ better mobility
+ allows you to have better positioning/stay farther from enemy warriors
+ unable to be stripped
+ no attribute points needed
- less energy gained
- limits spell usage when in use (gotta get those 10e spells out)
- limited usefulness of secondary

Channeling:
+ more energy gained
+ secondary has multiple useful skills
- takes a decent investment attribute-wise
- forces you to take up a position closer to enemy warriors, allowing them to more easily spike/pressure you
- allows easy access by enemy disruption virtue of positioning
- ability to be removed

Take your pick.

Gimme Money Plzkthx · Apr 09, 2007, 09:59 PM // 21:59

K, I was offline and not responding to posts even from the previous posts.

"Learn to read, IMO.
I said Channeling forces you to be closer to their damage dealers, and therefore gives you less time to prekite and preprot when they suddenly decide to come for you. My belief is that this will actually hurt your energy management in the long run." I wasn't directing the kiting comment at you.

@the retard flaming me for "not asking a question, just saying mo/e are scrub": If you actually bothered reading my first post, it said (and it was later clarified by my third post) that I was not asking which was better, I was asking for insight as to why people believe GoLE is better, and why there is a "bad meta". I also went on to say that nothing that people said would change my mind. In short, read more, flame less, and you will go much farther in life.

@Nadia: Actually, I did quit for a while during 6v6 (some time during January), so I only came back during the GoLE meta monking for a few days. I also somewhat mis-phrased my post, while I said I still thought channeling was better, I never really considered GoLE as an option, because when I ran channeling I got the job done just as well as the other guys running glyph. I monk plenty, just didn't that much in that meta. Perhaps my post would have been better phrased to say that channeling was still a very viable option, and at least as good.

Either way, this thread is supposed to be about GoLE post-nerf, and also only in reference to HA. I see a few posts about GvG and they're kind of irrelevant, if I had meant for this to be an overall skill discussion I would not have posted in the HA section.

B Ephekt · Apr 09, 2007, 10:09 PM // 22:09

Channeling was only good before if you sucked at Power Drain. It's even less useful now (imo) in the absence of IWAY and 8 million pets.

I hate healing prayers and hate playing skill spam monk bars, so I only play prot. For me, Glyph is more useful for things like Aegis, SoR, Divert, Spirit Bond, Prot Spirit, SoD, etc.

I've gotten so used to playing prot with Glyph in GvG and tombs that I just don't want to go back to a skill I never really liked. I also hate the bad positioning Channeling encourages.

I don't know any good monks (there aren't many in tombs thb) that use Channeling on a prot monk. However, I can see the use on the LoD.

If I join a PUG (which is very rarely) and they ask me to use channeling, I know they're probably bad and they usually are. So now when they cry I just go mo/me and take PDrain secretly.

Gimme Money Plzkthx · Apr 09, 2007, 10:24 PM // 22:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by B Ephekt

Channeling was only good before if you sucked at Power Drain. It's even less useful now (imo) in the absence of IWAY and 8 million pets.

I hate healing prayers and hate playing skill spam monk bars, so I only play prot. For me, Glyph is more useful for things like Aegis, SoR, Divert, Spirit Bond, Prot Spirit, SoD, etc.

I've gotten so used to playing prot with Glyph in GvG and tombs that I just don't want to go back to a skill I never really liked. I also hate the bad positioning Channeling encourages.

I don't know any good monks (there aren't many in tombs thb) that use Channeling on a prot monk. However, I can see the use on the LoD.

If I join a PUG (which is very rarely) and they ask me to use channeling, I know they're probably bad and they usually are. So now when they cry I just go mo/me and take PDrain secretly.

Are you kidding me? There are so many thumper teams with a zillion pets it's easy energy. Even without a load of pets, it's still good energy. Also, you don't need to run a "spam" monk bar, you just spam the skills that you would regularly bring--if you can can maintain energy, I really don't see how you can use a monk skill too often (except for something like infuse, don't make any stupid comments on this sentence please). The positioning argument has been run into the ground, I'm not going to repeat myself. You can take pdrain and channeling if you have enough skill slots, but you really shouldn't on a prot, maybe on an LoD... I'm not going to bother responding to the "no good prot monks use channeling" comment.

B Ephekt · Apr 09, 2007, 10:54 PM // 22:54

During the times I play, which is usually 7pm CST on, there aren't many thumper teams. I might generally see 1 team every hour with more than a single thumper, and very few with any thumpers at all. The American meta during the times I play is still largely aoe shitway.

OK, what I call spam is "red bars go up" monking. I don't enjoy watching a red bar and spamming slow casting healing spells, so I prot because I find it more involved and fun. This really has nothing to do with my arguments, however.

The positioning argument has been run into the ground because it is a valid one. Your comments are irrelevant to me because I understand the reasoning behind positioning. I don't care that you can come up with counter arguments or not.

I never said I took PDrain AND channeling, I said I took it instead of channeling.

There are very few good monk in tombs to begin with, even less that use Channeling.

The only time I've found Channeling to be useful on prot monks lately was in the two monk back lines I've been messing with lately. However, with 3 monk back lines I still prefer Glyph on the prot monks and Channeling on the LoD.

Gimme Money Plzkthx · Apr 09, 2007, 10:58 PM // 22:58

I know you didn't say you took pdrain and channeling, I was merely suggesting it. The positioning argument is largely irrelevant, I really don't see how people can say that if the other team wants to get you, you're going to stop them by backing up, or even make it harder for them. Again, not responding to the "there are more good monks that use mo/e," cause I just don't see it, but I do see very good monks using channeling. Also, your comment about 2 monk v. 3 monk backline pretty much proves that channeling is way better e-management.

Living Parasite · Apr 09, 2007, 11:02 PM // 23:02

Channeling on the LoD is quite a viable alternative as usually the only spell that they will carry with 10e+ is Infuse and Aegis.

B Ephekt · Apr 09, 2007, 11:06 PM // 23:06

The reason Channeling is better for 2 monk back line is because the monks have to spam their skills more often. In a 3 monk back line the prot monks can worry less about healing and more about pre protting. Glyph is still better for this, as it allows you to use high cost skills on demand, without the requirement that you're being trained by 3+ enemies.

At any rate, it's all about what you monk well with. I personally prefer Glyph because it fits my play style better.

Gimme Money Plzkthx · Apr 09, 2007, 11:34 PM // 23:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Living Parasite

Channeling on the LoD is quite a viable alternative as usually the only spell that they will carry with 10e+ is Infuse and Aegis.

If you bring aegis on an LoD, chances are you are very, very dead. There are just better skills and atts that can be put in, plain and simple. Also, an infuser would run out of energy vs. a spike really fast with GoLE.