Monks do have a clan that they can discuss with one another, it's true, and monks need that special attention, fine. But just because different envoys aren't in SM doesn't mean that their opinion and thoughts aren't valid, and that they shouldn't go ahead and envoy monks based on their own experiences.
If you want clear, fair discourse -- you need to divulge what exactly is going on in SM that is making progress so slow (to envoys), so that the other envoys can make decisions and move forward. Monk guilds and their envoys don't need preferential treatment on monk changes (not that I'm implying that you're saying so). Everyone can grasp and understand monk; they're not a difficult concept.
But most importantly, monks are making the game unfun. And what's more, people are starting to synergise with their monks on purpose for lame combos.
Well the reason would be unanimous consent is a really ineffective way to facilitate change of any kind. That's not really how the system works for anyone else, monks have always seemed to self impose some kind of bureaucracy on themselves since conception. I never understood Something Monkish as some kind of pseudo extension of the envoys. At best it's redundant, at worst I've seen it become an echo chamber of bad ideas (years ago).
I think it's easy to fall into the "monk-wide changes affect monks" mindset that is often expressed. The reality is it affects the entire game. Envoys are empowered to act independently for a reason. Adding another layer just makes changes drag on forever. Perfect example: this current monk damage issue is over a year old. Someone should probably just propose a change at this point, be it hardcap or removal of modifiers or what have you and allow the envoy process to do what it's designed to do.
Or everyone can discuss how much they hate monks version 4.7 in a year (disclaimer: may happen anyways).
Fair point actually, we can look at monk damage on a class by class basis. There isnt really any need to do it game wide. Envoy report for each class to balance out their skills, instant kills and damage. All monks dont have to do the same amount of damage or have it reduced in the same manner I suppose.
As maligorn said though there are a lot of insanely powerful un-fun mechanics to fix up. We've got reports in to fix the silliness that is succumb, we could get a few running for each of the monks to keep them functional but not too powerful.
Regarding the use of monk power, Nekotai certainly use power for scorpionfury. Kaife and nekreve are also important uses of power, kaife obviously, and nekreve for damage boosts - something Wobou makes good use of. Nekotai have lost the viability of our greenlock, but that also required power. So no, kaife is not the only thing that uses power. Harmony and stealth are also power heavy, harmony more so for combat than stealth, but I've been trying to add more stealth power moves. Psymet and acro also have important power moves for combat - I'm not sure what kind of objective your hyperbole is supposed to achieve, but it's highly inaccurate.
That said, the 2mo boosters are certainly a lynchpin I missed out in my previous post. They don't come without drawbacks - they are low damage, 2-handed actions, and you still don't get back to high mo before the opponent cures the prone aff mathematically. The drawbacks might need a re-look in the new meta, sure. There's definitely a conversation to be had.
Regarding other (non-monk) envoys making a report - the admin don't like that, but it's not like it hasn't been done before. I'll still respond to it the same way I'd respond to Anelissa's report, if and when she makes it. The idea that Something Monkish is some kind of special, privileged clan that is blocking changes is really just a baseless accusation. Since Anelissa is taking the lead, and there are discussions going on in the clan, it frees up the other envoys to handle other stuff and take the lead elsewhere. If anyone isn't happy with Anelissa's work, they surely will speak up. Something Monkish is a communication channel, not the illuminati. I appreciate all that Anelissa is doing.
Personally, I feel that she's doing a good job, and her approach of looking at all monks together for this is the right direction. The elevated damage is a concern with all monks, not just one of them.
In a situation where the monk can simply go through their kata the monk has plenty of opportunity to use kaife to achieve the repeated 2-form delayed cure afflictions. Scorpionfury is only 5p and lasts for more than long enough for the monk to casually expend power on things such as kaife, especially if they are lucidian. To imply that a monk will not have the power to use kaife due to the powerintensive moves in acrobatics/psymet is probably a more inaccurate hyperbole. I also don't see harmony being powerheavy unless you're escaping with wind. It's otherwise very set and forget.
Edit: I needed to reread your comment. The point I was trying to make is that it's possible and very doable, and shouldn't be dismissed because other avenues of expending power exist
(I'm the mom of Hallifax btw, so if you are in Hallifax please call me mom.)
== Professional Girl Gamer == Yes I play games Yes I'm a girl get over it
I never implied anywhere, directly or not, that a monk will not have power to use kaife. I specifically included kaife in my paragraph listing uses of power, and put it under important uses. I took disagreement to the comment that says there is no other use for monk power. 1p is a small limitation, especially with the new meta, yes. But the recurring characterisation of monks as unlimited by power is inaccurate and misleading, and irritating.
These are digressions from the damage problem, by the way, but can still be relevant, especially since prone is part of the damage problem. I'm not sure how helpful this is to Anelissa or Wobou comingup with the bandaid, but it's useful for me for future reports. At least more useful than bashing a comms clan.
It's not about bashing a communication clan. It's about being more willing to support envoys outside the SM clan. You know full and well that other envoys are capable of making informed decisions about the monk problem, which is not as one-dimensional as "oh they just have a damage problem". They have powerful afflictions that require little setup, damage that outstrips everyone except maybe axelords that have built wounds, low powercosts for extremely high rewards....and that's not even looking at Harmony and Stealth, and their tertiary options too. Furthermore, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth that you're in full support of stonewalling other envoys in making the changes that are so desperately needed.
I'd really like an example of times monks absolutely -need- to use 5 power on boosting, or 3p on nekreve and co. to get a kill, especially in group combat. (you know, besides gahtirak'sho and ugathalogg and finalsting)
However, I do get the vibe that the SM clan is endorsed by admins and you have your hands tied a little.
Wanting consensus from monk envoys to nerf their own damage is clearly not going to work. It only takes one monk with their head up their ass to grind the whole process to a halt.
It appears that there is more than one, based on 'something monkish' logs that I've seen. Nerfing the cheesy damage they have currently isn't in their interest, shockingly. You didn't see me whining when Pratfall was nerfed to more appropriate damage levels. Monk envoys need to suck it up and find a less boring cheesy kill mechanic than unstoppable uber-damage + affs.
Wanting consensus from monk envoys to nerf their own damage is clearly not going to work. It only takes one monk with their head up their ass to grind the whole process to a halt.
It appears that there is more than one, based on 'something monkish' logs that I've seen. Nerfing the cheesy damage they have currently isn't in their interest, shockingly. You didn't see me whining when Pratfall was nerfed to more appropriate damage levels. Monk envoys need to suck it up and find a less boring cheesy kill mechanic than unstoppable uber-damage + affs.
One on one I'm finding monk damage good enough to kill me but not good enough that I cant stop it with proper hindering.
A quick fix would be to just give all monks a Tahetso level viable instant kill, then their damage can as low as warrior damage no problem. May be a bit generic like but it'd do the job. I mean Shofang(outside of crush spam), Neko or Ninja simple couldn't kill me right now with out their damage.
1v1 is the situation where damage spam attrition is the least outrageous. In the more relevant group combat, it gets instantly out of hand, which is why it's a bad mechanic.
1v1 is the situation where damage spam attrition is the least outrageous. In the more relevant group combat, it gets instantly out of hand, which is why it's a bad mechanic.
But we don't want to leave them as useless though, its why I say fiddle with the instant kills. Like Tahesto with warrior+ damage would be a kind of perfect level to aim for I reckon. They have good afflictions and a very viable instant kill to build to for group or solo combat while doing that damage.
Yeah, I agree. I have nothing against tweaking up some instakill conditions if it turns out monks can't kill 1v1 after you nerf their ludicrous damage.
The two issues shouldn't be conflated though. Monks are doing more damage than they have any right to.
Should monk instakills get tweaked? That's another discussion that's much more complicated. Refusing to nerf monk damage without simultaneously buffing monk instakills is the mentality that led to us still having sap more than a year after everyone agreeing that it needed to go.
I can very much relate to not wanting to end up with possible months without -any- method of killing your enemies. All this talk about groups is nice and good, but 1vs1 happens often enough these days that you actually want to have a potentially usable kill method if you don't want to be a target dummy, at least in my opinion.
-however-, I think that can be arranged even with nerfed damage. We have a few envoys who don't have a lot of high priority stuff to report. So, if every monk envoy would prepare a report that fixes their instakill to be at least somewhat doable and in the same time one of the people who don't have much to report would offer their report to nerf monk damage, we could possibly accomplish that within a single envoy cycle. And am pretty sure if we let admin know, we can count on them being implemented in relative close succession too.
Plus, I'm pretty sure that both monks and non-monks are sad enough about the situation to have willingness to spend a few reports to address the situation.
I don't understand. What part of the existence of Something Monkish is stopping envoys, monk or not, from making their reports? Anelissa is leading the monks envoys on this, and she uses SM as a channel to do this leading rather than sending individual messages and tells. When she makes her report, consensus or not, I will still comment and criticise it with every argument that I can think of, the same as I would do for any non-monk making the report, and the same as I would do for any report that doesn't touch on monks.
If Anelissa wants to make sure she has support from every monk envoy in SM before she makes her report, I'm more than happy - I feel that is the best way forward, obviously, because it ensures that I, a major stakeholder, have a say in this. Obviously, the advantages to doing it this way are enormous - she removes the risk of having missed out on some pertinent point. It creates buy-in from the other monk envoys, and, if everything goes perfect, ensures her a base of support from those most invested in the change. She gathers suggestions in advance, and can pre-empt possible problems, or plan for objections. The first iteration of the report will not be a raw draft, but will instead be an already improved version. It will have some rough edges rubbed out already.
It also builds goodwill, a secondary concern amongst envoys naturally, who must have their focus be on the actual reports they make, but if we're talking about efficiency and making changes and cooperation, then more won't hurt, provided it's not at the expense of balance. I appreciate Anelissa for the effort she puts in, and more importantly, I feel appreciated - my opinion is not ignored, and she values my opinion enough to ask me, enough to consider it, and I feel like she's working with genuine goodwill to effect a change that is beneficial for me as well. If Anelissa decides, at the end of the day, to put forth a proposal that goes against my advice, I'll just comment my concerns on the report, the same as I would if she did not approach me in advance, but I feel better about it. Her job is not to make me happy - but to affect change, but I don't feel ignored, and whatever the final verdict from the admins, I am assured that my opinion has been considered.
A collaborative effort improves quality, and if we're serious about making good changes, as I believe the envoys I work with are, I don't see the problem with it. If any other envoy would like to make a report without these advantages, at the risk of getting a solution that doesn't meet their objectives, or even a direct rejection, it's their prerogative, it's their right. Just like it is Anelissa's right to decide when to proceed with the report - with our input or not. Anelissa could have ignored all other opinions to put out a report - that she makes the effort to reach out is something I appreciate.
This repeated characterisation of envoys cock-blocking changes is irritating. If we see an issue, we must raise it, that's our job. And that applies to both other envoys seeing an issue with monk damage, as well as the monk envoys seeing an issue with a suggested change to bring that in line. No one is demanding that Anelissa stop her reports - I personally have seen no such pressure from Something Monkish. Trying to make it seem like Something Monkish is some kind of malicious union ordering strikes and stopping progress when things don't go their way is ridiculously self-centred, and blind. I say this again and again, Something Monkish is a communications channel not the italian mafia. And repeatedly, some replies would have been some variation of "STOPPING PROGRESS, GRIND TO A HALT, PREVENTING REPORTS, SELFISH ADVANTAGE".
Wargames: I was on a team with Ollie/Romaan/Enadonella and my mudlet crashed, logged in and the game put me on another team. The perfect Lusternian PVP experience ensues:
It's a mudlet replay. Save it somewhere, click the replay button and select it. I don't really know if it'll work for anyone else, but it does for me. It doesn't show the commands I sent though, just what's incoming from the game.
I don't need to download to know what this is about! Great work, Shedrin. I fell into complacency with the numbers we've had in the end and I totally missed your meteor. Despite, I've been reading your Domoth log for an hour or so earlier that day, and getting amazed by all those meteor kills <.<
Talk about alertness!
"Oh the year was 453CE, how I wish I was in Serenwilde now... aletter of marque come from the regent to the scummiest aethership I ever seen, gods damn them all...I was told we'd cruise the void for auronidion and dust, we'd fire no turrets, shed no tears.. now I'm a broken man on a Hallifax tier, the last of Saz's privateers."
I can very much relate to not wanting to end up with possible months without -any- method of killing your enemies. All this talk about groups is nice and good, but 1vs1 happens often enough these days that you actually want to have a potentially usable kill method if you don't want to be a target dummy, at least in my opinion.
-however-, I think that can be arranged even with nerfed damage. We have a few envoys who don't have a lot of high priority stuff to report. So, if every monk envoy would prepare a report that fixes their instakill to be at least somewhat doable and in the same time one of the people who don't have much to report would offer their report to nerf monk damage, we could possibly accomplish that within a single envoy cycle. And am pretty sure if we let admin know, we can count on them being implemented in relative close succession too.
Plus, I'm pretty sure that both monks and non-monks are sad enough about the situation to have willingness to spend a few reports to address the situation.
Its kind of like how almost every envoy wants to nerf the effectiveness of succumb in group but it just doesnt seem to happen.
If you did, I must insist you read the comments and check the initial party who proposed the incoming nerf.
"Oh the year was 453CE, how I wish I was in Serenwilde now... aletter of marque come from the regent to the scummiest aethership I ever seen, gods damn them all...I was told we'd cruise the void for auronidion and dust, we'd fire no turrets, shed no tears.. now I'm a broken man on a Hallifax tier, the last of Saz's privateers."
I can very much relate to not wanting to end up with possible months without -any- method of killing your enemies. All this talk about groups is nice and good, but 1vs1 happens often enough these days that you actually want to have a potentially usable kill method if you don't want to be a target dummy, at least in my opinion.
-however-, I think that can be arranged even with nerfed damage. We have a few envoys who don't have a lot of high priority stuff to report. So, if every monk envoy would prepare a report that fixes their instakill to be at least somewhat doable and in the same time one of the people who don't have much to report would offer their report to nerf monk damage, we could possibly accomplish that within a single envoy cycle. And am pretty sure if we let admin know, we can count on them being implemented in relative close succession too.
Plus, I'm pretty sure that both monks and non-monks are sad enough about the situation to have willingness to spend a few reports to address the situation.
Its kind of like how almost every envoy wants to nerf the effectiveness of succumb in group but it just doesnt seem to happen.
To save you the trouble of having to read a report that's up since the 14. december 2016, by wobou, developed in talking with me, which I commented at the first comment that he has spoken with me and I fully support the solution we agreed on together. Also, if you read the whole thing, you'll discover that I said I had an alternate report in the queue and was waiting to catch him online to discuss a few things before I put it up. So please, read first :-)
Its been many months since people have requested a fix on it though. Similar to how its been a long time since people have been requesting adjustments to monks. Plus report 1583 Solution 1 wont fix the issue of group succumb throwing out 5k+ mana ticks. Its just a case of well don't expect overpowered monk damage or overpowered succumb to be fixed very quickly its something we just have to deal with while things are getting adjusted.
Its been many months since people have requested a fix on it though. Similar to how its been a long time since people have been requesting adjustments to monks. Plus report 1583 Solution 1 wont fix the issue of group succumb throwing out 5k+ mana ticks. Its just a case of well don't expect overpowered monk damage or overpowered succumb to be fixed very quickly its something we just have to deal with while things are getting adjusted.
As the report mentions, it's a 'first step'. I also pointed out that there's a second report in the queue that's waiting on simply me catching another envoy, which will likely happen by the weekend. And, as falmiis mentions, the code is active since October ( succumb is far older, but it worked very differently before the 16th of October ). It was actually the last change done by Ryboi, my predecessor as MD envoy.
You know, calling for a 'fix' or 'nerf' is easy, designing a solution that does works while being balanced is another story entirely. You are, of course, welcome to suggest thought through and relevant solutions and I'm glad to listen to them ( and I mean that, I'm glad if people have ideas for solutions that are actually thought through for both the relevant class and their opponents ). That being said, I'm hopeful that we'll have at least the step from 1583 in, in this cycle and, unless things go wrong, even both.
edit: removed misleading last sentence, irrelevant to discussion.
Exactly it takes a long time to fix things. Succumbs numbers were insane when they came out and envoys like falmiis and others said so at the same. Its taken two months to get an initial report to the drafting stage and it'll take longer to put in a fix. We have to be patient with these things.
Comments
== Professional Girl Gamer ==
Yes I play games
Yes I'm a girl
get over it
If you want clear, fair discourse -- you need to divulge what exactly is going on in SM that is making progress so slow (to envoys), so that the other envoys can make decisions and move forward. Monk guilds and their envoys don't need preferential treatment on monk changes (not that I'm implying that you're saying so). Everyone can grasp and understand monk; they're not a difficult concept.
But most importantly, monks are making the game unfun. And what's more, people are starting to synergise with their monks on purpose for lame combos.
edit: inb4 some counter about manakills.
Fair point actually, we can look at monk damage on a class by class basis. There isnt really any need to do it game wide. Envoy report for each class to balance out their skills, instant kills and damage. All monks dont have to do the same amount of damage or have it reduced in the same manner I suppose.
As maligorn said though there are a lot of insanely powerful un-fun mechanics to fix up. We've got reports in to fix the silliness that is succumb, we could get a few running for each of the monks to keep them functional but not too powerful.
That said, the 2mo boosters are certainly a lynchpin I missed out in my previous post. They don't come without drawbacks - they are low damage, 2-handed actions, and you still don't get back to high mo before the opponent cures the prone aff mathematically. The drawbacks might need a re-look in the new meta, sure. There's definitely a conversation to be had.
Regarding other (non-monk) envoys making a report - the admin don't like that, but it's not like it hasn't been done before. I'll still respond to it the same way I'd respond to Anelissa's report, if and when she makes it. The idea that Something Monkish is some kind of special, privileged clan that is blocking changes is really just a baseless accusation. Since Anelissa is taking the lead, and there are discussions going on in the clan, it frees up the other envoys to handle other stuff and take the lead elsewhere. If anyone isn't happy with Anelissa's work, they surely will speak up. Something Monkish is a communication channel, not the illuminati. I appreciate all that Anelissa is doing.
Personally, I feel that she's doing a good job, and her approach of looking at all monks together for this is the right direction. The elevated damage is a concern with all monks, not just one of them.
Edit: I needed to reread your comment. The point I was trying to make is that it's possible and very doable, and shouldn't be dismissed because other avenues of expending power exist
== Professional Girl Gamer ==
Yes I play games
Yes I'm a girl
get over it
These are digressions from the damage problem, by the way, but can still be relevant, especially since prone is part of the damage problem. I'm not sure how helpful this is to Anelissa or Wobou comingup with the bandaid, but it's useful for me for future reports. At least more useful than bashing a comms clan.
I'd really like an example of times monks absolutely -need- to use 5 power on boosting, or 3p on nekreve and co. to get a kill, especially in group combat. (you know, besides gahtirak'sho and ugathalogg and finalsting)
However, I do get the vibe that the SM clan is endorsed by admins and you have your hands tied a little.
It appears that there is more than one, based on 'something monkish' logs that I've seen. Nerfing the cheesy damage they have currently isn't in their interest, shockingly. You didn't see me whining when Pratfall was nerfed to more appropriate damage levels. Monk envoys need to suck it up and find a less boring cheesy kill mechanic than unstoppable uber-damage + affs.
One on one I'm finding monk damage good enough to kill me but not good enough that I cant stop it with proper hindering.
A quick fix would be to just give all monks a Tahetso level viable instant kill, then their damage can as low as warrior damage no problem. May be a bit generic like but it'd do the job. I mean Shofang(outside of crush spam), Neko or Ninja simple couldn't kill me right now with out their damage.
But we don't want to leave them as useless though, its why I say fiddle with the instant kills. Like Tahesto with warrior+ damage would be a kind of perfect level to aim for I reckon. They have good afflictions and a very viable instant kill to build to for group or solo combat while doing that damage.
The two issues shouldn't be conflated though. Monks are doing more damage than they have any right to.
Should monk instakills get tweaked? That's another discussion that's much more complicated. Refusing to nerf monk damage without simultaneously buffing monk instakills is the mentality that led to us still having sap more than a year after everyone agreeing that it needed to go.
-however-, I think that can be arranged even with nerfed damage. We have a few envoys who don't have a lot of high priority stuff to report. So, if every monk envoy would prepare a report that fixes their instakill to be at least somewhat doable and in the same time one of the people who don't have much to report would offer their report to nerf monk damage, we could possibly accomplish that within a single envoy cycle. And am pretty sure if we let admin know, we can count on them being implemented in relative close succession too.
Plus, I'm pretty sure that both monks and non-monks are sad enough about the situation to have willingness to spend a few reports to address the situation.
If Anelissa wants to make sure she has support from every monk envoy in SM before she makes her report, I'm more than happy - I feel that is the best way forward, obviously, because it ensures that I, a major stakeholder, have a say in this. Obviously, the advantages to doing it this way are enormous - she removes the risk of having missed out on some pertinent point. It creates buy-in from the other monk envoys, and, if everything goes perfect, ensures her a base of support from those most invested in the change. She gathers suggestions in advance, and can pre-empt possible problems, or plan for objections. The first iteration of the report will not be a raw draft, but will instead be an already improved version. It will have some rough edges rubbed out already.
It also builds goodwill, a secondary concern amongst envoys naturally, who must have their focus be on the actual reports they make, but if we're talking about efficiency and making changes and cooperation, then more won't hurt, provided it's not at the expense of balance. I appreciate Anelissa for the effort she puts in, and more importantly, I feel appreciated - my opinion is not ignored, and she values my opinion enough to ask me, enough to consider it, and I feel like she's working with genuine goodwill to effect a change that is beneficial for me as well. If Anelissa decides, at the end of the day, to put forth a proposal that goes against my advice, I'll just comment my concerns on the report, the same as I would if she did not approach me in advance, but I feel better about it. Her job is not to make me happy - but to affect change, but I don't feel ignored, and whatever the final verdict from the admins, I am assured that my opinion has been considered.
A collaborative effort improves quality, and if we're serious about making good changes, as I believe the envoys I work with are, I don't see the problem with it. If any other envoy would like to make a report without these advantages, at the risk of getting a solution that doesn't meet their objectives, or even a direct rejection, it's their prerogative, it's their right. Just like it is Anelissa's right to decide when to proceed with the report - with our input or not. Anelissa could have ignored all other opinions to put out a report - that she makes the effort to reach out is something I appreciate.
This repeated characterisation of envoys cock-blocking changes is irritating. If we see an issue, we must raise it, that's our job. And that applies to both other envoys seeing an issue with monk damage, as well as the monk envoys seeing an issue with a suggested change to bring that in line. No one is demanding that Anelissa stop her reports - I personally have seen no such pressure from Something Monkish. Trying to make it seem like Something Monkish is some kind of malicious union ordering strikes and stopping progress when things don't go their way is ridiculously self-centred, and blind. I say this again and again, Something Monkish is a communications channel not the italian mafia. And repeatedly, some replies would have been some variation of "STOPPING PROGRESS, GRIND TO A HALT, PREVENTING REPORTS, SELFISH ADVANTAGE".
I was on a team with Ollie/Romaan/Enadonella and my mudlet crashed, logged in and the game put me on another team.
The perfect Lusternian PVP experience ensues:
https://ada-young.appspot.com/pastebin/KJRJjm5M
== Professional Girl Gamer ==
Yes I play games
Yes I'm a girl
get over it
https://ada-young.appspot.com/pastebin/pzQHX5sa
Edit:
On the plus side, when I got to fight with Tarken, miasma was actually viable for once. I couldn't believe it myself.
== Professional Girl Gamer ==
Yes I play games
Yes I'm a girl
get over it
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10031849/Lusternia Logs/2017-1-5 Wargames replay.dat
It's a mudlet replay. Save it somewhere, click the replay button and select it. I don't really know if it'll work for anyone else, but it does for me. It doesn't show the commands I sent though, just what's incoming from the game.
Talk about alertness!
-Kilian
If you did, I must insist you read the comments and check the initial party who proposed the incoming nerf.
-Kilian
Not sure what you mean, people had been asking for a fix to succumb since October. Monks even longer
You know, calling for a 'fix' or 'nerf' is easy, designing a solution that does works while being balanced is another story entirely. You are, of course, welcome to suggest thought through and relevant solutions and I'm glad to listen to them ( and I mean that, I'm glad if people have ideas for solutions that are actually thought through for both the relevant class and their opponents ). That being said, I'm hopeful that we'll have at least the step from 1583 in, in this cycle and, unless things go wrong, even both.
edit: removed misleading last sentence, irrelevant to discussion.