U72 Early Look 2: Monk Revamp

[saekee]

Doing what most people want results in vanilla play and generic gaming. You can have the best if all worlds by keeping the combo system. Some will use it, most won’t. That is good.

Most players do not ever drop into stealth, sneak quests, flower sniff, do all opts or even read dialogue boxes. Should we nix all of those?

 

[Xeang]

1) "The combo builders are not particularly strong."

2) "Combo-building is clunky due to cooldowns."

3) "The combo system is easily interrupted by common actions, resetting your combo."

These reiterations of the Devs points to eliminate the combo system present a great loss of (priorly) free abilities that players could elect to use with admittedly considerable cost (the 3 points). But throwing out the baby with the bathwater by making a very few of the finishers available with 1 button but locked behind trees and costing AP is a definite nerf to monks.

All finishers were basically available to monks by level 3 if they were willing to pay the cost of those 3 points above. By all means make changes to the monk trees -- they need it -- but leave the builder-finishers in place for those players willing to work the challenging system. I, like others, enjoyed the challenge and abilities. Now I am nerfed to have some of the finishers locked by trees (one of the best ones locked behind the archtype tree which I will never use outside of 3 lives for their passive benefits).

"[They] wanted to make the Trees more flexible. In the current Live version of Monk, your tree selection is strongly restricted by weapon...
[Their] plan here involves making these trees more weapon-agnostic (even if they may still include some bonuses to those weapons) and instead refocuses them on themes. Ideally, this will lead to more diversity of Monk builds and more interesting choices."

Their actions are counterintuitive and ultimately counterproductive. What they make up for in weapon diversity ultimately comes at the cost of locking abilities we could use before behind trees. Furthermore, they introduce and/or keep damage and defenses to each tree (to a varying degree).

"The new system will be better than the old system", but they can't be bothered to explain how watering down a system with ubiquitous bonuses despite a supposed clear focus in each tree is supposed to be "better"??? They can't be bothered to explain how some circumstantial buffs that we now have to pay points for are supposed to compete with some of the best abilities the class has to offer, but this is somehow better???

Agreed. Thumbs up on weapon diversity -- but not at the cost locking a few select finishers behind trees.

And the last paragraph I quote from Tux I think is the most salient. Devs please address the many sincere concerns by players in this thread. At least give us your reasoning and arguments against them -- whether we agree with them or not. The silence to many repetitive questions, issues and concerns give the appearance that contrary feedback in this forum is not welcome. Please interact with many of the points raised and let us know we and our concerns are on your radar.

 

[Tilomere]

The number 1, 2, and 3 things that players looking to play monks asked for was
1) Revamp of builder-finisher to remove builders or to otherwise simplify them
2) DPS
3) Simpler gameplay

SSG is delivering exactly what majority of feedback asked for. The ED feedback also gave overwhelming negative feedback to builder-spenders as well, so it's not like this is the first time game design pivoted to accommodate player gameplay preferences in this way for an overall more enjoyable game experience.

Go ahead though, if you feel the player base's opinion on builder spenders has shifted, feel free to post another survey in general and see what the results are.

 

[Neo]

The number 1, 2, and 3 things that players looking to play monks asked for was
1) Revamp of builder-finisher to remove builders or to otherwise simplify them
2) DPS
3) Simpler gameplay

SSG is delivering exactly what majority of feedback asked for. The ED feedback also gave overwhelming negative feedback to builder-spenders as well, so it's not like this is the first time game design pivoted to accommodate player gameplay preferences in this way for an overall more enjoyable game experience.

Go ahead though, if you feel the player base's opinion on builder spenders has shifted, feel free to post another survey in general and see what the results are.

1. Deleting something is not revamping.
2. DPS loss as a result of 1 is not a DPS buff.
3. Gameplay should be simpler because you can now just go THF barb because monk will feel so terrible.
So not really delivering on anything.

 

[MCPeePants]

The number 1, 2, and 3 things that players looking to play monks asked for was
1) Revamp of builder-finisher to remove builders or to otherwise simplify them
2) DPS
3) Simpler gameplay

SSG is delivering exactly what majority of feedback asked for. The ED feedback also gave overwhelming negative feedback to builder-spenders as well, so it's not like this is the first time game design pivoted to accommodate player gameplay preferences in this way for an overall more enjoyable game experience.

Go ahead though, if you feel the player base's opinion on builder spenders has shifted, feel free to post another survey in general and see what the results are.

Is your position that you posted the poll with the understanding that simplifying monk gameplay would be achieved not only by removing the builder/finisher -system- (ideally keeping finisher functionality but making it easier to achieve) but by deleting the finishers from monk? And that additional simplification would be achieved by duplicating the exact same "+attack/+damage" in all three trees? And further, that all of the people who voted in that poll also understood this to be the case when voting?

 

[Nickodeamous]

1. Deleting something is not revamping.
2. DPS loss as a result of 1 is not a DPS buff.
3. Gameplay should be simpler because you can now just go THF barb because monk will feel so terrible.
So not really delivering on anything.

This. 100%.

I play DDO cause I love the monk style. I've always played monk as my main (regardless of the nerfs).

What is happening is the dumbing down of monks in sake of not being able to get the code to work right due to spaghetti code and a short timeframe to shoehorn this in by end of Feb.

 

[Vertigo]

1. Deleting something is not revamping.
2. DPS loss as a result of 1 is not a DPS buff.
3. Gameplay should be simpler because you can now just go THF barb because monk will feel so terrible.
So not really delivering on anything.

if you can´t see this is a slight buff to monks, then I´m sorry. And Tilo was 100% correct in his post.

 

[PersonMan]

This. 100%.

I play DDO cause I love the monk style. I've always played monk as my main (regardless of the nerfs).

What is happening is the dumbing down of monks in sake of not being able to get the code to work right due to spaghetti code and a short timeframe to shoehorn this in by end of Feb.

The people who like strawberry voted that rocky road should be strawberry.

 

[florondusk]

Some of us are arguing about the loss of the Finishers and their dps an utility. The extra dps in the new trees may or may not replace the dps of well managed combos. So on dps i will say it might be a wash we would have to see.
Removing the builders system did not necessarily mean replace it with 20% of it in the skill tree charging players for power they once had free that is a huge loss of conditional power and utility.
That Utility is why many play monk and centering has very large costs to a characters effectiveness in both dps (harder to get a good crit profile) and defenses (MRR cap no PRR from base armor needing 2 stats to keep up ac with armor ranges).
We Should have the option at very low opportunity cost to keep the level of utility that make monk work for us.
The skill trees cost way more and provide less of this utility than the old system. This change will "fix" the simplicity and even might "fix" dps but it does not let monks keep their niche as a support/utility melee the way they are now, and they do not replace the niche with a convincing alternative. This is not even touching on the loss of the healing shield that provided sustain for light monks and their melee allies.
Now could we have simple alternatives to these utility attacks in the system? Sure why not? Should monks have to lose most their useful heroic moves only to buy back less than a third of them? NO.

 

[Phaedra]

The new trees look designed for taking 3-8 monk levels on builds that were going to wear robes anyway, They'd have been pretty good for 2011 (before we had trees) when everyone who wasn't a plate-tank was running around in robes because they had a higher AC ceiling and if you weren't hitting 80AC at 20 it didn't matter if it was 4.

 

[Tuxedomanwashere]

Most players do not ever drop into stealth, sneak quests, flower sniff, do all opts or even read dialogue boxes. Should we nix all of those?

Don't give them any ideas!

 

[Phaedra]

Doing what most people want results in vanilla play and generic gaming. You can have the best if all worlds by keeping the combo system. Some will use it, most won’t. That is good.

Most players do not ever drop into stealth, sneak quests, flower sniff, do all opts or even read dialogue boxes. Should we nix all of those?

They tried to back door remove them by making reapers un-stealthable.

 

[Drachmor]

I may be a little late to the party here, but the fact that the healing strike thing is no longer auto-granted at monk level 3 is genuinely going to be a bummer… I liked that thing. I have it on builds that can’t really afford the AP to actually go into the monk trees much - it was a ton of value for just having the splash alone. I hope they reconsider the accessibility of this attack, as it was a very cool part of splashing monk levels imo

 

[Tianblade]

Could we add an AOE effect on the elemental strikes or imbues. Like a small chance to do a fireball on a fire hit, or a mass freeze on a cold hit?

 

[Fisto Mk I]

Could we add an AOE effect on the elemental strikes or imbues. Like a small chance to do a fireball on a fire hit, or a mass freeze on a cold hit?

I think henshin imbues add to all henshin SLA like Bolt, Wave and Cauldron.

 

[5 Other People]

Hiya, I recommend folks interested in monks to take a listen to Sev & Cordo's Twich chat at around the 21:20-26 min marks. True most of what has been said is re-hashed, but I get the impression that more finishers could find a way back into the final monk re-vamp. At one point he says "combo's weren't satisfying, b/c monsters were dead by time combo was built"(min 22)...although that lines up with what players are saying in that they mainly want the finishers.

What @Severlin seemed to miss was the finishers were not simply about DPS, as he went into "DPS chains" and explained how combos slowed DPS down. (All true!) However, folks wanted finishers that do buff/debuffs. Many players find placing the finishers into the trees as a loss of monk diversity and they find too few of the desired finishers. Sev didn't speak to how the other finishers could be acquired & this is what I see is the last major gap between players and @SteelStar (or rather the notes @SteelStar has published anyway)

Many comments in this thread have suggested that finishers be selectable during the level-up process like other attacks (Sunder, Stunning Fist, Trip). For instance a super easy resolution would be to add "At level 1, 10, 16 & 18 a monk gets to select a bonus Martial arts Finsher feat." The list should be all finishers, even ones in trees & maybe the most powerful are only available at the higher levels.

 

[Neo]

Saying that its a dps loss to build combos is either intentionally gaslighting or lack of understanding on how the game is played. Combo builders just attach to your animation, and you can prep them running between packs. Losing a 6 second autocrit and a mini fast and furious on a 6 second cooldown is a huge dps loss when you are fighting a boss or in a raid. They take no more time to build than it takes to hit the mob normally.

Being forced to spend AP in order to get something back that is being taken away and having its CD increased also just feels bad and results in losing more because you have less to spend on utility and effects you would normally spend that AP for. IE bird attacks/bird 50% fort debuff.

 

[5 Other People]

Saying that its a dps loss to build combos is either intentionally gaslighting or lack of understanding on how the game is played.

I think it's level dependent. For example at lvl 1 100% true, at lvl 34 where you get epic strikes or you've multi-classed into other trees and have access to more powerful strikes, then it's conceivable to believe that the cost of the builder strikes is less when compared to the benefit of these other strikes. I do think those comments were focused more on end game.

Although, it's equally possible that I'm missing something here too.

 

[Neo]

Lack of understanding game mechanics is a perfectly acceptable reason to be wrong. But its important that the devs listen to players that actually deep dive into the class that they play and have a solid understanding of that class when it comes to the changes they bring. Especially when the change is meant to be a buff.
The only strike difference as it relates to single target dps/boss dps(which btw is the only area monk needs help) from levels 20 - 34 are adren/quick cutter and fast and furious. And thats assuming you go fury instead of LD/GMOF/SD which I wouldn't recommend but people do it. It takes at MOST 2 seconds(in the video linked below it takes me a second to build a combo) to build FDF which is an auto crit and 2 seconds to build EEE.

If you go adren instead of quick cutter it doesn't break the builder chain, so normally you want to adren your FF and your EEE and then FDF as often as possible. Using the bird attacks in the downtime. You have plenty of time to use the builders and the finishers in the downtime of your FOTW strikes.

Ive attached a video from 3 years ago where I discovered the 6 second CD on monk finishers. Each finisher has a 6 second CD that is not shown by the finisher feat on your hot bar. Which makes it seem like the finisher is not going off and contributes to the clunkiness of finishers.

Monk finisher building

 

[5 Other People]

I'm not trying to argue, I want to understand your perspective.

In your video you get a couple good crit strikes in, but the time in which it takes for you to build those to those strikes many melee builds will have exceeded the dps output by continuously attacking...please to provide details as to how the time to build to a finishers does not reduce the lack of damage-per-second as compared to say an Assassin knife build that's spamming active attacks the whole time?