Curse

jibikao · Nov 30, 2005, 04:58 AM // 04:58

I am tired of arguing with random teammates. Personally, I don't like going after monk first but in 4v4 game with two monks (the worst is one Healing and one Protection), I have no choice.

99% of the people Call Out Monk. Is this REALLY the best strategy? Just want to hear your opinions.

My opinion is it depends. If there is a soft target like Ele, Necro, Mesmer, I always go after them first and force the monk to heal him while my teammates chase the monk. I use pet to interrupt so I can easily shut down a Necro or Ele.

But my teammates would say "Oh, you noob. Always kill monk first!"

Monk doesn't hurt you (besides Smiting). The other teammates do. I believe if I can shut down one of Monk's weapons (Ele, Ranger etc), we have a chance. It just pisses me off that Monk always seems to have unlimited of energy. They just keep healing/protecting nonstop. I am already doing great dmg but you can never out damage a monk. Is this a flaw, at least in 4v4?

I feel there are not enough counters to Monk.

QuixotesGhost · Nov 30, 2005, 05:21 AM // 05:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by jibikao

It just pisses me off that Monk always seems to have unlimited of energy. They just keep healing/protecting nonstop. I am already doing great dmg but you can never out damage a monk.

I suggest you play a monk yourself for a bit, it'll help you figure out ways to break them.

Honestly it really depends on a lot of factors who should get called first. Like for example, there is a common arena monk build, Mo/E that takes Odsidian Flesh, Kinetic Armor, Armor of Earth, and/or Healing Touch. This monk has a huge amount of durabilty but the Archilles heel is that he had very little ability to keep anyone else alive. If your team plays "Mob the Monk!" you lose, if you call anyone else you win.

A big reason why the monk instead of a squishie gets called first, is that a lot of damage based characters are packing a bit of disruption alongside thier attacks. Things like Fear me!, Gale, Blackout, Disrupting Chop, Knockdown, Ranger Interupts, ect. It makes it easier to take a character down if you can hit the monk with this disruption instead of a squishie. So you call the monk.

It defantley pays to be able to throw a monkey wrench in the enemies offense, but I find the best way to do this is to do a lot of target switching, throw a condition or a hex or an interupt someones way and move on.

Tranquil Soul · Nov 30, 2005, 05:26 AM // 05:26

Okay, my pvp kill ladder is:

Offensive mesmers(interrupt or e-denial spammers), Prot. monks, other mesmers, healer monks, necro's, ele's, rangers, warriors.

I do think your logic is flawed though; you say that a monk doesnt do anything to hurt your team, but: they keep the other team alive, thus the other team CAN hurt you, hence: the monk is hurting your team.

Also, you should never attack a monk alone, nor should you leave someone attacking a monk alone; follow the caller, no matter what (unless he tells you to attack a warrior first or something...). Only with coordinated attacks and calling will you ever be able to EFFECTIVLEY take out a decent monk.

NatalieD · Nov 30, 2005, 05:31 AM // 05:31

The way I see it, killing any enemy is much harder when there's a monk alive, so it just makes sense to hit the monk first, thereby minimizing the number of difficult kills you have to pull off and maximizing the slaughter of the now-hapless remaining enemies.

And speaking as a monk, I can say that my job is generally a whole lot easier when the enemy is attacking someone other than me, or better yet, is splitting up chaotically instead of focusing fire.

QuixotesGhost · Nov 30, 2005, 05:39 AM // 05:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tranquil Soul

Also, you should never attack a monk alone, nor should you leave someone attacking a monk alone; follow the caller, no matter what (unless he tells you to attack a warrior first or something...).

There's times when a warrior should be called first. Like this one time when I ran into one of the aforementioned Mo/E tank builds + 3 Warriors. Spend all day whacking on that monk, I guarantee a warrior will go down first. Which they did once we target switched.

Traps are also another good example. Arena monks often like to hang back behind thier casters often putting them out of healing range of warriors that run forward. If he charges blindly into a bunch of traps and you focus him, you can often take him down before the monk can run forward to save him.

twicky_kid · Nov 30, 2005, 05:46 AM // 05:46

i found attacking 2 targets wears down a monk much faster then just attacking him alone.

make him decide himself or his party member. usually they choose themselves

Vermilion Okeanos · Nov 30, 2005, 05:46 AM // 05:46

The best players would understand that it is almost always "as situation given".

Depending on the situation that you should adjust your tactic.

But, it if quite unfortunate that it is hard to find groups going at each other all out with such high level play. So, usually the basic will do just fine.

Tranquil Soul · Nov 30, 2005, 05:57 AM // 05:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by QuixotesGhost

There's times when a warrior should be called first. Like this one time when I ran into one of the aforementioned Mo/E tank builds + 3 Warriors. Spend all day whacking on that monk, I guarantee a warrior will go down first. Which they did once we target switched.

Traps are also another good example. Arena monks often like to hang back behind thier casters often putting them out of healing range of warriors that run forward. If he charges blindly into a bunch of traps and you focus him, you can often take him down before the monk can run forward to save him.

Okay you're right, but I'm speaking in generalities.

I can think of countless times when it WAS better to target a non-monk char., like a ward spamming earth ele in tombs or when there is a tanker monk (to use your example). But MOST of the time the monk should be one, if not the primary target.

Alone) · Nov 30, 2005, 06:36 AM // 06:36

Why is it that people think that all attacking one is the best way to go? Aren't people creative enough to be able to think of strategies?

Sure. Targetting a monk first could be a good idea. But remember that you're team is being picked out at the same time while the monk can be healing him/herself.

You can always just leave problems for the monk. Ever tried using a mesmer? Like... BACKFIRE? Even though it lasts 10 seconds, many people just don't... notice it. Sometimes.

Or health degen skills/spells.

You can just have ONE person on the monk distracting him or her so it forces self healing. Maybe an elementalist spiker, or a disrupt ranger. Or anyone that can keep the monk busy.

Personally, I go attack mesmers or elementalists first.

With every build, there's a counter.

Shwitz · Nov 30, 2005, 07:01 AM // 07:01

It's hard to get Comp. Arenas teams to go along with me, but when I play my Melandru's Arrows build, I tend to be able to take down an enchanted target fairly quickly, even if its by myself, so when I first get into the arena I assess my team's capabilities whenever possible, and ask what they're doing as far as skills.

If they're chatty and are willing to talk in the seconds before the match starts, I'm in business. I tell them that I'm going to attack an enchanted target, and that depending on what the other team has it might be best for the rest of them to focus fire on a different target. My target and what I think the rest of the team should be targetting is *completely* dependant on context - I usually ask my teammates to go for a mesmer or monk first (or a warrior if he's using Frenzy), while I tend to prey on elementalists (who almost always are running an attunement, making them prime targets for Melandru's Arrows) or necromancers (who like to run enchantments like Awaken the Blood, Dark Aura, Blood Renewal, and all that jazz). Splitting targets up like that seems to work pretty well. Other times, I'll distract the monk with my attacks while other teammates focus fire on a squishie. Making healers split their attention is a great tactic.

In reference to the OP's comment about dual monk 4 person teams, the most effective way to counter this is a well-timed Blackout from a mesmer primary or secondary. Hover around one of the monks, get ready for a spike, start the spike and the Blackout simultaneously. In this situation, I like to Blackout the protector and spike the healer in most cases, unless its a Life Bonder protector, in which case its easier to spike the prot and Blackout the healer. But I'm rambling...

In short, it's not always best to target the monk first, but it can help matters, depending on your and the other team's setup.

Patrograd · Nov 30, 2005, 08:13 AM // 08:13

In Arenas it is usually, although not always, the best policy to gank the monk. This is because in a 4 sided against a good monk you will rarely have the offensive power to take down a non-monk who is being healed. In tombs or GvG it is almost always the wrong choice (there are exceptions of course).

Comes down to evaluating the enemy team and prioritising targets based upon the situation. Last night in GvG for example we were getting alot of trouble from the enemy shutdown mesmer, and as a result our defence wasnt working as well as it should. The battle was pretty static for quite a while until we made the decision to take down their mesmer again and again until he didnt get up. That was the end of that and from there on in it was pretty easy work. Other times though you come across a really good infuse healer, or a barrier monk, or a martyr/restore conditions monk and he needs to be taken down in order for your offence to work. Sometimes its the enemy ward ele - depends

So target priority comes down to evaluating the enemy teams strengths and weaknesses, and your team's strengths and weaknesses, and prioritising the enemy most likely to stop your plan from working.

For balanced tombs PUGs without voice coms against a balanced team i would generally pick: mesmer (protect your own monks' energy), necro (deny them corspe exploitation), monk (deny them healing), ele, ranger, warrior, unless it was a spike group, in which case you want to take down one of the spikers or their orders necro first.

in general terms if the target you have called isnt going down easily switch targets until you find one that will, and this applies as much to arenas as any other form of PVP

Navaros · Nov 30, 2005, 08:19 AM // 08:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vermilion Okeanos

The best players would understand that it is almost always "as situation given".

Depending on the situation that you should adjust your tactic.

But, it if quite unfortunate that it is hard to find groups going at each other all out with such high level play. So, usually the basic will do just fine.

This post is totally correct.

Going after monks first is a decent general rule, but it certainly is not wise to apply it universally.

What you should kill first depends on what is causing the most harm to your team, and what your team is easily able to kill fast. In many cases, this may very well be the monks that heal/protect other targets. But to always only go after monks first is folly IMO.

pearhk · Nov 30, 2005, 09:02 AM // 09:02

For me, if i found my team cannot take the called target shortly
i will switch target ALONE (i.e. i dont call) to distract enemy monks' healing
i will keep my energy above 50% this time

and then i will call the target with 50%-60% HP
and spend ALL my energy

if target didnt down, i will save energy for next wave

Elrodien · Nov 30, 2005, 12:21 PM // 12:21

I find, that if you see a mesmer shooting past your front line, you should target him/her first. They are going to wreak havoc on your monks and no amount of hex-breaker is going to save them. This is from the perspective of a monk who has seen this happen too many times while the warriors in the front chase after an elusive monk.

But generally, I agree that it depends on what your up against. Targeting seems to me to be a very important skill especially in the tombs. You need to be able to have great situational awareness as well as being able to read the game ( knowing when some one has mark of protection on cast on them for example). You also need to be able to confuse the opposition by switching targets when they least expect it.

Spending most of my time at the back of a group, I totally respect the guys that do the calling, its a vital part of the game and will win or lose you games.

One other point: After playing as a warrior recently, I would disagree with the general assumption that a warrior should do the calling. The warrior, imo gets in too close to the enemy to really be able to see what is going on around him. I think an ele or a ranger are better suited to the calling role.

judge1121 · Nov 30, 2005, 12:57 PM // 12:57

i do this as a hunter

i stalk the prey and see the weak one of the team. the weak usually is the one to run toward us in a rush from a different direction from his team. a massive amount of dmg and the prey is dead.
Aside from that i usually go monks first. and is always the prot monk. although if i see 2 ppl on the monk i usually do a solo job and go kill the mes/nec/ele/monk so basically another caster.
it usually, like all say, depends. i mean who u gonna target in a monk team... the monk? if they all clumped up a meteor shower gets them all so u dont target that much. u just got to go for the weakest of the team and if u dont then go for the monk that is saving that weakling

Yukito Kunisaki · Nov 30, 2005, 04:32 PM // 16:32

I'm sure you'd need only one person to take out a monk if the others go after someone else...

If you can't kill him, disrupt him! ^_^

A lone hammer warrior with prot enchantments slamming on an enemy monk should easily do the trick with the right skill set.

Elrodien · Nov 30, 2005, 05:03 PM // 17:03

Depends. If you are in CA or TA, you can easily handle one warrior beating you with a hammer/axe/sword. In tombs, if you have only one warrior to contend with you will be laughing. Its when 4 air eles and a mesmer all target you when you wish you had brought a change of underwear...

jibikao · Nov 30, 2005, 05:04 PM // 17:04

The more I think about it, the more I believe this is scissors, rock, paper situation.

In random arena, you don't know what you are getting. If you have 2 warriors on your team and the opponent has a protection monk, your team is pretty much doomed.

This is where I think the imbalance is: Monk is useful in ANY given situation, whereas other classes are not. My conclusion.

Numa Pompilius · Nov 30, 2005, 05:36 PM // 17:36

I agree with jibikao.

I have often felt that the smiting/protecting bit should be a different class from the healing; having both those branches in one class is what makes monks so much more versatile than any other class.

Del12 · Nov 30, 2005, 06:05 PM // 18:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alone)

You can just have ONE person on the monk distracting him or her so it forces self healing. Maybe an elementalist spiker, or a disrupt ranger. Or anyone that can keep the monk busy.

You would be amazed that with one warrior on a monk, how many monks panic into self healing, letting their teammates die one by one while they struggle to keep themselves alive.

I used to have the 'everyone on one target' mentality, but lately i like having at least one off target just for that reason.