Curse

Porkchop Sandwhiches · Jul 01, 2005, 10:45 PM // 22:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Racthoh

Monks ruin the game IMO. The amount of time you have to waste waiting for an arrogant monk to join your group is annoying

Just get the bloody henchmen and stop complaining. They're there for a reason. If you're that stressed about not being able to get a monk, make your own.

For everyone who generally complain about monks I'm not quiet sure what the big deal is. They are the *weakest* class. How many other classes do you know that it takes up to three of them to do their job *properly*. If anything, you should be asking for them to be stronger instead of crying, "Nerf them!".

Drakron · Jul 01, 2005, 11:20 PM // 23:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eclair

Go do Abaddon's Mouth and Hell's Precipice with no monk, e/mo, Mhenlo, or Lina =P

If you can do it then you're right, we dont' need primary healers.

Hell's Precipice is pulling and concentrated fire ... no monk will ever replace that.

There is a tricky part in Abaddon's Mouth (the seals) that requires a dedicated monk because its easy to lose focus of the situation and end up dead, monks do help with that part but I think most people rather have fire elemetarist on those missions due to their AoE nuke spells over dedicated healer.

Eclair · Jul 01, 2005, 11:22 PM // 23:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drakron

Hell's Precipice is pulling and concentrated fire ... no monk will ever replace that.

There is a tricky part in Abaddon's Mouth (the seals) that requires a dedicated monk because its easy to lose focus of the situation and end up dead, monks do help with that part but I think most people rather have fire elemetarist on those missions due to their AoE nuke spells over dedicated healer.

Whoa, so you can beat Abaddon's Mouth with no dedicated healer?

Personally I would take a water/earth elementalist over a fire elementalist for most of the rest of the missions. Fire AoE damage isn't really anything special, wards help out a lot more IMO =P

Phades · Jul 02, 2005, 04:39 AM // 04:39

Dunno about the no healer thing against chain lightning toting mursaat and meteor/shower spamming imps. Hell the herds of imps in shiverpeak slinging malestorm/mind freeze are bad enough. Also having burn effect on constantly while in melee range fighting at hell's precpice at times, quite simply melts anyone in melee without proper healing. Also, for places like UW, seting up a warrior to tank axe fiends is fine, until he starts bleeding or a couple hits goes through and needs healing.

"How many other classes do you know that it takes up to three of them to do their job *properly*"

I dont know too many jobs where the standard build requires shutdown and mass damage to remove them from the equasion. Actually only one comes to mind and its not a warrior or tanking ranger (ie not normal builds).

Thom · Jul 02, 2005, 05:00 AM // 05:00

I have to step in and bring some reason to the conversation. About 1/3 of PvP players and 1/4 of PvE players need to be heal/support focused in either a Mo/*, El/Mo or Me/Mo role (with the rare healing rangers). While much of the support is focused in Monk skills, wards and wells are a boon on any team and a good support elemenentalist, ranger or Necro is undervalued. Healing is a neccessity at some point since damage is inevidably done and I prefer not to have to heal myself. 1/3 of players go support/heal so the rest of us can focus on what we really want to do.

If you build correctly and you have an experienced group you can be successful with less than 3 monks against all but the best teams. It is fun to bring a pair of smiters and an elmo or two along with the standard three healer: you have your standard healing team of 3 and you you appear to have 3 or 4 monks only some of whom are healing. By the time your opponent figures you our, hopefully you have the advantage. The monk-hate phenom has much to do with the easiest way to form a PuG and less to do with the strategic richness of the game. The top teams will likely run 3 monk builds, but the best build you and your friends run may not include a copy-cat healing system. BE CREATIVE AND STOP WHINING.

Schorny · Jul 02, 2005, 01:09 PM // 13:09

Threads like that is why I hardly join PuGs as a Monk. Most missions are doable without a healer, of course some are very very tough without one.

If you don't want to stay in the tombs waiting for 2 more monks - then star your own team. Maybe a 8 W/Mo Team, or just 8 spike damage dealer or whatever.

Or: just start your own monk if you think there are too few.
There are too few monks out there, that is true. So start your own monk and stop complaining.

And remember: if a team is bitchy, I don't join them or leave quickly. I have enough invites to decide which team I join.

I'm not arrogant or stuff, but why should I bother with people I don't like? If I get a friendly invite message I may join your group, but if you all just click on "invite to party" chances are low that I'll join you...

Drakron · Jul 02, 2005, 03:40 PM // 15:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eclair

Whoa, so you can beat Abaddon's Mouth with no dedicated healer?

Personally I would take a water/earth elementalist over a fire elementalist for most of the rest of the missions. Fire AoE damage isn't really anything special, wards help out a lot more IMO =P

Until the gate seals, that part needs a healer/res because of the seals and the anoying spawn of enemies on the rear that can end the group real fast if we dont watch it.

And the reason you want a Fire elementar is that they can nuke the enemies on the walls, water and earth lack the AoE for it and the enemies there dont have fire resistence anyway.

Daneaus · Jul 02, 2005, 04:47 PM // 16:47

Its a tad depressing to read the negative opinion on the character class and the character of those who play monks. I personally play a dedicated healer/diviner monk and love to help people. There are times I'm just running to different towns to get skills and a group will ask for a monk... I'll go along just to be helpful. Not all monk's are "arrogant" or will deny all party requests. While I agree that monks are not always required, there are missions where they are. Wouldn't you like to have a monk with you, even just one, who enjoys playing a monk and thus does the job well? You can't compare a henchie to that.
Strategically I think that having a monk does make the game harder. There are places like Snake Dance and The Falls where enemies target healers after they cast their first healing spell. I think that adds an extra degree of strategy; to have to properly set up a way to defend your healers or to set yourself as the target over said healer. Also having a monk frees the other classes to put more thought into their skill packages. You wouldn't have to take along that spell/enchantment that heals you in place of your Earth Shaker or Hundred Blades. So having a dedicated healer class helps to increase the strategic depth of the other classes, while also allowing you to make better use of your strong points... which healing wasn't meant to be one of.
Well I think that's all for now, thank you for the time.

Ensign · Jul 02, 2005, 07:26 PM // 19:26

Realistically you want 1 Monk up until the desert, 1½ Monks in the desert, and 2 Monks after the desert. You can get away with more or less Monks depending on player skill and equipment.

As for the topic at hand, I do think that Monks make PvE less strategic, or at least most players seem to use them that way. That is, Monks are your safety net. If you make a mistake and do something stupid, good Monks will bail you out. The more Monks you have, the dumber you can be and still survive. So while the Fire Islands are entirely doable with two Monks, and desert missions can be steamrolled by a team with a single Monk and a bit of defense, most players are completely unable to function under those conditions. They're used to going Leeroy on every mob they see with their Warrior, to standing their Elementalist in AoE and tanking melee mobs, and there's simply no way a team that bad can survive without seriously overloading on Monks.

Of course PvE already has very little strategy for the most part. Besides a few select maps, time is never an issue, meaning that you simply have to outlast the opposition. Since most mobs have very little, if any, healing, the PvE game really boils down to good defenses winning out and the offense being all but irrelevant. Eight healing Monks could beat most of PvE by simply wanding everything to death.

Look at the maps and situations that give players the most trouble - Mursaat Monk bosses and the Monk/Priest combo in Thirsty River. Why are they such a problem? Because they actually require a good offense from a team. The Warriors can't just sit there and expect to eventually win as long as the Monks keep them alive - they have to kill things now, to break down defenses, and the rest of the game has left them completely unprepared for this.

I wouldn't blame Monks for making the game less strategic - I'd blame the design of the PvE portions of the game for being so favorable to heavily defensive strategies.

Peace,
-CxE

theclam · Jul 02, 2005, 08:17 PM // 20:17

Speaking as a Monk, I don't think that Monks necessarily make the game less strategic. Without Monks, every player needs to play perfectly, in order not to die. With Monks, you've got room to make errors. Does that reduce strategy? I don't think so. For every element of strategy that is removed because you've got a Monk, there's an element of strategy that the team has to execute, whether it's aggro control, energy conservation, or something else. Plus, even with 2-3 Monks, you can't go to the UW or FoW without a good strategy and execution, or you'll die pretty early.

While Ensign is right regarding offensive vs defensive emphasis, I think he's overstating it a little bit. If you don't have sufficient offense, then your Monks will run out of energy well before the battle is over. One thing that I like about Guild Wars is that if you want to, you can play a very defensive game.

In PvP, I think Monks add strategy. Monks are powerful enough that the primary objectives in most PvP matches are taking out the enemy Monks and keeping your Monks alive. That adds an element of strategy that wouldn't be there if a defensive game wasn't viable.

Flee · Jul 04, 2005, 10:15 PM // 22:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheBigStunna

I kinda gotta agree with racthoh having to rely on one class and monks you HAVE to have this class in pvp was kind of a let down.

14 wins in a row(4v4), no Monk. And I didnt have a heal with me. The only heal we had was a necro with the well of blood @ +3 regen only.

the_veil · Jul 05, 2005, 04:17 AM // 04:17

Theclam said it well.

I'm a monk, I get spammed with invites, but I sort of scratch my head at that. I mean, a healing monk is an asset, of course, but it's more a safety net than a strategy-ruining class. More specifically, some players (often warriors, for whatever reason) throw strategy out the window with a monk around because they know that net is there to catch them. But really, it's silly; I have a warrior, too, and warriors live fine on their own, just with a different strategy.

I think it's because players get stuck in these simplistic roles when really all sorts of combinations work great. Example: Does a good team NEED a tank? Of course not. Or sure, tanks are great. Lots of options, and monks who heal are one of them. I firmly believe a protecting monk, in the right hands, is just as awesome as a healer, and I've seen mesmers and necromancers absolutely rule the battlefield.

This is PvE, though. In PvP, the strategy does change, of course, but there too monks aren't necessary. In other words, this: Monks don't ruin strategy, but players with simplistic expectations or bad habits make it seem like monks ruin strategy.

Monks seem to get inaccurately stereotyped as badly as warriors. It's just that warriors tend to get a NEGATIVE stereotype and monks get a positive one, hence the strange, high demand for them. And unfortunately, the stereotype starts to lead to reality (good players start to lean towards monks, bad players stick with warriors, etc.) But really--and I'm talking AS a monk--strategy is strategy and the good players know better.

toastgodsupreme · Jul 05, 2005, 05:17 AM // 05:17

Monks increase damage potential of the entire team. If the team can focus on damage output while relying on the monk for health (through healing or protection), all the better.

ZING · Jul 05, 2005, 08:44 AM // 08:44

Are you kidding me?!? Is this thread for real??
Take a monk who knows what he's doing out farming in Perdition Rock with ONE Warrior. There's so much strategy from the Monk and the War it's not even funny.

A good monk who knows what he's doing is worth his weight in gold -- LITERALLY!

And most groups have to wait for a monk because they're retarded n00b groups that waste their talents and time. People who play as monks (for whatever reason) can sense when a waste of time group is asking for them to join.

I've NEVER had to wait longer then 5 min for a monk to join me. Any combination of "Pro, Group, Whisper, Plan, Know How, Patience" seems to bring a monk to your side.

Any combination of, "CAPS LOCK, blind invites, CAPS LOCK, join our group cause we're t3h awesome, CAPS LOCK, spamming, CAPS LOCK, join our group cause we're t3h awesome+CAPS LOCK" seems to have a negative effect on getting monks.

The monk is a quite and gentle creature, easily scarred off by death and groups that bring certain death. Treat with care

Eet GnomeSmasher · Jul 05, 2005, 09:08 AM // 09:08

I wont argue if Monks make the game less or more strategic.

BUT the reliance and neccessity on them is a bit too much. And in PVP it's almost an absolute must to have a Monk in your group. In Tombs it's 3 monks minimum. What other class is in such high demand?

Schorny · Jul 05, 2005, 09:12 AM // 09:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZING

Any combination of "Pro, Group, Whisper, Plan, Know How, Patience" seems to bring a monk to your side.

Any combination of, "CAPS LOCK, blind invites, CAPS LOCK, join our group cause we're t3h awesome, CAPS LOCK, spamming, CAPS LOCK, join our group cause we're t3h awesome+CAPS LOCK" seems to have a negative effect on getting monks.

Quoted for truth.

Ayarri Kentra · Jul 05, 2005, 12:16 PM // 12:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eet GnomeSmasher

In Tombs it's 3 monks minimum. What other class is in such high demand?

Air elementalists.

Three monks is minimum? I thought just one is minimum. Three monks is handy for five weak armored air elems for example. I still think most groups have two monks on avg. not three.

Acheus Lokine · Jul 05, 2005, 01:42 PM // 13:42

I'm really sick of hearing people complain about monks. "Rez me! Heal me! I'm dead! My health is x of x!" Well hey, my energy is 2 of 30 because you keep aggroing random groups, and I keep healing you. Don't complain that you're dying when you aren't helping make my job easier. I wish more people would actually think before they aggro, see if the monk (and everyone else for that matter) is ready for a mob, and then attack. Most W/Mo builds I see just aggro everything and it's really annoying as a monk, especially when they get mad that I couldn't heal them. Monks don't make the game easier or less strategic, monks simply add another facet to the game: healing. It's pretty hard to heal yourself and fight at the same time, that's what you have monks for; keeping you alive while you take down the enemy.

Tailon · Jul 05, 2005, 02:42 PM // 14:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZING

Any combination of "Pro, Group, Whisper, Plan, Know How, Patience" seems to bring a monk to your side.

Any combination of, "CAPS LOCK, blind invites, CAPS LOCK, join our group cause we're t3h awesome, CAPS LOCK, spamming, CAPS LOCK, join our group cause we're t3h awesome+CAPS LOCK" seems to have a negative effect on getting monks.

Well said.

I've always enjoyed playing a healer-type, but in this game, I gave up on my monk when he reached level 10 because of all the blind invites and too many "WTF!!111 omg, you are a n00b b/c you wont join uz" whispers. I do not consider myself arrogant at all, if someone sends me a whisper asking if I want to do this or that, I will join. But I had to create a dedicated E/MO healer in order to slip away from all that ninja inviting and rude whispers, since the people tending to send out invites/whispers like that, probably thought "omg, a healing E/MO, what a noob" and hence diddn't bother me.
A few days ago, I created a PvP monk, and so far I've been called a noob countless times because I diddn't ressurect someone in the middle of a heated battle, or because I got shut down by a mesmer and couldn't heal. I don't know were Im going with this; guess I'm just trying to explain why some monks might seem arrogant, since the monks I've talked to tends to agree with this. It's not fun being in a group that keeps harassing you. If the group has a bad attitude, I finish whatever we were doing, then I'll leave. I'd rather just wait a bit to get a group with a polite and nice attitude, with people that actually whisper you asking something like "hey, we're doing xxx, we really could use a monk, if you want to join us, let me know

". If I end up in a group like that, I don't care what we'll be doing, or how good the group is, because it's much more rewarding than beeing in one of those "here's a blind invite" groups (allthough they can off course be nice on a rare occation as well).

Anyway, back to topic:
I think that you would have an equal amount of strategy in the game regardless of wether or not there were a healing class. The only thing that would change, is what kind of strategy that would be. With healers, a good strategy is to let the damage dealers concentrate on damage output, and also trying to conserve the healers engery by not rushing too fast, and to try and keep the healers semi-safe (allthough most monks are very capable survivers given the right conditions). Without a healer, the strategy would maybe be a more "all for one self" strategy, where you had to concentrate on damage output, AND staying alive at the same time. Pulling and aggro control would be very important here.