So you're saying it's been 2 months instead of 4 months. So?
Regarding the monk agility balances thing, I was vocal about not having agility bonuses in the new buff system when it was first put in place, and I still maintain that stance. The difficulty of balancing speed bonuses is always a sore point. Given that my previous opinion was overruled, though, I intend to balance based on the existence of this mechanic.
This is pretty much my position as well. For specifically the Stealth bonus, I don't mind that. Both Stealth guilds should be balanced with that in mind, of course, but I think it's largely monk primaries that are the problem. Eventually we'll get a chance to sort everything out with the monk overhaul, though.
While that may be the first log, monks have been in that form for far longer than that instance, alas.
... Yes, and people weren't aware of it until it was raised to attention. You implied that people were abusing things with the full knowledge of an existing problem, and as an active participant in the forums (and at least an occasional combatant), I'm disputing that. I literally hadn't been told of this concern until your first log, even when I was doing the fighting.
It's great that things, when they surface, are fixed. But I take offense when people try to make it out to have been feet-dragged, when it clearly, and demonstrably, wasn't the case. This was fixed as quickly as it could have been.
Your aura of weapons rebounding disappears. Flapping his wings furiously, a caliginous dream phoenix with glowing wings made of sparks creates a gust of wind that slams into Tarken. --> You appear to have caused an untrapped error in the code. Please don't execute this command again right now.
Thanks for the logs. I'll also look into that error; for some reason, the game thought you were a pile of gold sovereigns.
That's gold, Jerry! Gold!
Anyway, I think monk damage is both significantly higher than other classes with less setup and cost, and high priority afflictions as well. This is most relevant in group contexts, which is the primary balance focus. The lack of kill ability 1v1 is unfortunate, but was sacrificed for now. The monk overhaul should hopefully finally bring monks into a good place in all contexts if done correctly.
Its not that significantly higher though. They hit 1k to 1.7k combos out for the most part in early combat.
Don't sprain something patting yourself on the back so hard.
I am a warrior. That is why I said STILL PRACTICING monks. I helped bring the issue up, but I am not actually one of the ones who has to sign off. Remember my class is Minstrel.
We got some numbers and fixed things, they are bandaids till the overhaul is all.
You mean like most classes in the game? Also, silent heroes don't usually spend the preceding four months literally two-three hitting people while asserting that they're in a fine position.
That said, the hotfixes seem to be putting them in a better position, even if the affliction rate is, as has always been, absurdly high.
There is a piss poor record of classes self balancing. Most won't balance until there is a giant rant on forums or admin tell them to fix it. This change was sparked by it being brought up and grabbing a couple monks to verify in testing.
Some guilds have huge issues that they just try to never fix. I won't name anyone, cause people know who they are.
If all our envoys did nerfs as often as monks did since Monkish came out, the game would have been a better place, but still be completely crazy in overhaul limbo now <.<
It's been a while, I'll be first to admit, but comparing these two and calling them equivalent is a bit of a reach.
Unless things have changed a lot, cosmic fire is just a basic attack skill and only does damage. Monk combos do damage as well as open up afflictions from momentum + bleeding. Raw damage numbers are not enough to compare them with one another.
@ how long monks have had ridiculous dmg
I thought monks have had ridiculous damage ever since that overhaul change on how damage dealt and received was calculated? The main reason it wasn't brough up on the forums sooner was because monks weren't (yet) as commonly used as other classes.
I personally remember seeing various comments regarding monk dmg from various OOC clans like Gaudi's hogwash and Halli's city clan (I forgot the name, sry halli :<) ever since October. Although it is possible these two orgs are just a bit saltier from not having their own monks yet....... Like, there was that one Glom monk who was tearing it up on deathsight, and even he admitted over various logs that he's just an alt taking advantage of EZ monk. That was, I think, October of last year? So 3 months, at least, that monk damage have been under scrutiny (not necessarily on the forums).
And if you keep it under wraps, making remarks about it to a small circle of people, how am I supposed to change it? How are the admin supposed to change it?
Building up discontent and dissatisfaction to yourself, and then expecting an immediate, snap change upon providing the first log?
Hey, if you want to do that, that's fine. We'll just do what we're supposed to do when it is actually brought to attention, be damned to expectations. But turning around and making snide remarks when that finally happens, rubbishing other people's efforts and making yourself out to be a victim? Yeah, sorry if I seem to have a lack of sympathy. I don't have any to spare.
Just talking sustained and burst classes there are better classes than monks for both now. There are classes that have better damage than monks and better instant kills and utility. Not talking about the past. I'm simply talking about now.
The past doesn't really matter to me, who got what nerfed or who did what.
Monk damage is fairly easily handled now post-nerf. Its not that much bigger than most classes and its less than what some classes/specs can reliably do. I'm not saying monks are good or bad, just talking about damage and utility for solo or group combat.
Long story short Monks damage is easily handled if you match your resistance to their buffs. If you let them attack you non stop with 0 interruption you'll probably die. If you hinder at even a minor bit all their damage is easy to tank.
This thread is about damage so I'm basically just posting that the reduction seems to have gone quite well in making monk damage a fairly easily handled thing.
And if you keep it under wraps, making remarks about it to a small circle of people, how am I supposed to change it? How are the admin supposed to change it?
Building up discontent and dissatisfaction to yourself, and then expecting an immediate, snap change upon providing the first log?
Hey, if you want to do that, that's fine. We'll just do what we're supposed to do when it is actually brought to attention, be damned to expectations. But turning around and making snide remarks when that finally happens, rubbishing other people's efforts and making yourself out to be a victim? Yeah, sorry if I seem to have a lack of sympathy. I don't have any to spare.
I personally could not be bothered to bring up monk damage issues, especially since Lusternia has a reputation for descending into vitriol and crazyvwhenever combat changes are discussed and proposed. see: night choke, pyromancer report, fearaura/wolf, starhymn report to name a few.
However, making a blanket statement that no one has been watching and making use of monk damage beyond two months ago is false and misleading. It's also a bit distasteful to call everyone who have been supporting the nerf as 'playing the victim.' You, nor anyone else, have the right to use arguably overpowered abilities and then call yourself a hero for 'fixing' it.
They didn't even fix it in a timely manner. An admin had to step in before monks obliterated Ascension
EDIT: I guess my question is...how did you not see this coming? Why was this allowed to happen? Why didn't you fix your instakills (general you) and lower damage in the many months following the switch to condensed physical afflictions (i.e. ice and some dust).
I personally could not be bothered to bring up monk damage issues, especially since Lusternia has a reputation for descending into vitriol and crazyvwhenever combat changes are discussed and proposed. see: night choke, pyromancer report, fearaura/wolf, starhymn report to name a few.
However, making a blanket statement that no one has been watching and making use of monk damage beyond two months ago is false and misleading. It's also a bit distasteful to call everyone who have been supporting the nerf as 'playing the victim.' You, nor anyone else, have the right to use arguably overpowered abilities and then call yourself a hero for 'fixing' it.
I make blanket statements? I do? I'll dispute that right the hell now. Every one of my posts on this thread have been reactionary to specific statements made by people in this thread. This is a statement of intent, and, by the way demonstrably provable. Every single one of my posts in this thread had a quote box in them, except for the last one, which was right after yours. Hint: I was replying to you. In all of my posts, the people I was talking about, are specifically those people quoted. Yes, that means I was referring to Maligorn in my post to him, when I wrote the sentence "delusional people thinking they are some kind of poorly treated victims of a grand conspiracy" (I assume this is the sentence that set you off about me calling other people victims). Yes, that also means I was referring to YOU (specific you, Anaklusmos, not a general you, like Maligorn's above post) when I said the following line, specifically the bolded part:
... Hey, if you want to do that, that's fine. We'll just do what we're supposed to do when it is actually brought to attention, be damned to expectations. But turning around and making snide remarks when that finally happens, rubbishing other people's efforts and making yourself out to be a victim? Yeah, sorry if I seem to have a lack of sympathy. I don't have any to spare.
Are my statements of intent specific enough for you now? I'm referring to named people in this thread, in other words, so don't worry about me apparently making "blanket statements" about many different people not in this thread. I'm not. Ironically, I also supported a (different) nerf. Does that put me in your camp of people I'm apparently making blanket statements about? I've literally not made any blanket statements about anyone surrounding this issue, even in other threads, until people started making snide remarks about monks abusing their power. Sure, many people have been watching monk damage - you included, apparently. No one provided logs to raise the issue - all these people who were "watching", like you (specific you, Anaklusmos) they also kept quiet. Sure, you can say you "personally could not be bothered" to contribute and bring it up because of your own preferences. That's entirely fine. But then don't blame people for not noticing the problem. What the hell am I supposed to do? Read your mind?
As a matter of fact, I obviously also fought other monks myself in that same period (like Wobou), and no, I did not notice a damage issue in how fast I died. Which, by the way, is why I was unconvinced from the first log. Which is why I defended the status quo in an argument, based on my own experience. I was unconvinced.Which by the way, is why multiple logs and extensive discussion is needed.I wasn't not going to, and will not, make that kind of change without the evidence and argument to back it up.
You can say all you want about how long ago you noticed the change etc etc. How great you are for noticing it, and how evil I am for apparently reserving some "right to use arguably overpowered abilities and then call [myself] a hero for 'fixing' it" (By the way. Tell me exactly where I called myself a hero for 'fixing it', please. Go on. Show me.) That's your right - and I have no interest in getting involved with your delusions. But yeah, do it without making literally false statements. Because, Yarith's statement (and now yours), which set me off was literally false. If you're still not sure why I reacted the way I did, here, let me help you out:
"...spend the preceding four months literally two-three hitting people while asserting that they're in a fine position..."
No, it was not four months. No, there was no discussion with logs that I (or anyone) could have used to "assert" anything until his posts. Edit: And unlike YOU (specific you, Anaklusmos), at least he provided logs that were integral to making the changes. As for you...
And apparently, I'm the one who is "false and misleading". Hah. Get over yourself.
They didn't even fix it in a timely manner. An admin had to step in before monks obliterated Ascension
EDIT: I guess my question is...how did you not see this coming? Why was this allowed to happen? Why didn't you fix your instakills (general you) and lower damage in the many months following the switch to condensed physical afflictions (i.e. ice and some dust).
Your question is partly answered above. I participated in fights myself, granted not as much as I would personally have liked over the last year, but no one raised an issue with me about my damage and when I fought with Wobou, I didn't think his damage was over the top either, on the receiving end. That is also, by the way, why I was reluctant to do a monk-wide nerf myself, and targeted Nekotai at first.
The other part of the post: Nekotai instakill was also (and hopefully still is) viable. (If that has changed, I'll be making reports to tackle that once I get enough evidence to make a case.) And lastly, most other monks probably thought the monk overhaul was coming in sooner rather than later, and did not make many changes. As a matter of fact, I did actually make a reports to lower ScorpionFury's effectiveness and change ScorpionTail in that period, and was told to wait until the overhaul (#1389, #1439). I most certainly don't blame any of the other monks for not trying to make any reports to change their primary skillsets. Read the admin verdict on my two reports, and tell me what you would have done as an envoy.
Edit: As an additional note, Yarith's first log posted (the post I quoted last page in this thread, page 5 of the "You guys really need to post more logs" thread) was on the 15 December, 2:33am, my local time (you can hover over the date to see the information, apparently). Which is UTC+8. Which means it was 6 hours (5 hours and 27 minutes, to nitpick) before the finalisation deadline of the December envoy reports. Did you expect me to make a report in 6 hours (when I wasn't even convinced yet)? The next report cycle (Jan) had a report to nerf monk damage, made without full agreement from all monk envoys. In other words, a report was made at the next available slot even without waiting for more deliberation and discussion, when one couldn't be reached.
And if you keep it under wraps, making remarks about it to a small circle of people, how am I supposed to change it? How are the admin supposed to change it?
Aren't you supposed to be a knowledgeable monk envoy? Are you saying you don't even know what your skills do?
Ciaran. Do you think it's a case of "Oh, I know what this skill does!" translating directly into "Oh, this means the skill needs to be changed!"? Do you really think that? I call bullshit. I also specifically said, in my last post, that (verbatim): "...multiple logs and extensive discussion is needed.I wasn't not going to, and will not, make that kind of change without the evidence and argument to back it up."
You're not an amateur combatant. Don't pretend to be one, that you don't understand that basic premise. Even affliction abilities, which can be simplified into evaluations of "This skill gives X amount of affs per Y amount of seconds", are not a simple case of "anything above this threshold is OP." Anyone making an argument to change a skill based on nothing else but affliction per second is going to invite a long hard look, and extended discussion about the nature of those afflictions. The same goes for damage, especially when we're talking about monk damage, which had (and still has, right now) multipliers based of different conditions, buffs, resistances etc etc. This isn't the first time I've demanded logs to base changes on damage from. When Arcanis made a fuss about Cantors years ago, I also repeatedly asked for logs - I'm not going to change that now.
I know what my skills do - and I wrote a long post defending the status quo in reply to Yarith's first log. I've referenced this like, five godforsaken times now. Why don't you go and read that, and see the rationale behind why it was disputed, when there were not a lot of logs to go by? Obviously, my arguments did not take into account enough factors, and were based off outdated data. Logs proved my arguments wrong, and demonstrated a need for change - and if no one brings this up for discussion, I'm not going to know.
It took half a year to buff warrior wounding when everyone said it was super weak. It takes a long long long long time to get changes through. Buffs or Nerfs.
Not sure why anyones making a big issue over the timescales.
I realize that you can't fix anything if no one speaks up. I realize it's unfair for you to read our minds and do independent testing on something you didn't know needed testing, right? And furthermore, I realize that there just haven't been actively PKing monks in the past few months, making the problem hard to pinpoint. It just irks me a bit (I'm not -that- salty, I swear) when some guy starts praising himself and all the monk envoys for fixing themselves...when half of them had to be dragged kicking and screaming to the conclusion even after being presented with the facts.
Also, I remember when envoys successfully argued for a monk damage buff when the old wounding system was scrapped during the warrior overhaul. That's the root of the issue, really, it seems.
EDIT: Yes, I know, monks lost damage that scaled from old deepwounds.
The changes asked for needed to be justified with logs, and I see absolutely nothing wrong with discussion and arguments. I don't understand what your opposition to people talking it out, and disagreeing, is. We've been through this before. None of the monk envoys were doing anything other than what they were tasked to do: which is to look at the situation in all the different perspectives, bring their arguments together and hash it out. If there was no discussion and no dispute, and everyone just nodded their heads and went, "yeah, sure", that would be a problem.
Give me the chance to turn back time and do it again, and I assure you 100%, I will make the same arguments I did, engage the same people I did, review my arguments in light of theirs the same way I did, and dispute statements or arguments that I did not think were supported well enough. Make no mistake, as it stands, there remains no log of Ninjakari or Tahtetso damage of the same sort as the Nekotai/Shofangi logs, and there remains, right this moment, no hard evidence in the form of combat logs of Ninjakari or Tahtetso needing this change. This is a bandaid based off Nekotai/Shofangi combat logs, applied to the other monks based off a logical theory, yes. But it is still theoretical, nothing more, and if actual combat logs surface to prove that Ninjakari (or Tahtetso, or Shofangi, or even Nekotai) after these tweaks require more changes to be adjusted, be it to adjust it upwards or downwards, I most certainly will be there to advocate for those changes, and I fully expect all the envoys to do so as well, AND argue against it, as they see fit.
"Dragged kicking and screaming"? Yes, you bet I argued against the change until logs proved me wrong, and I will continue to base my arguments on evidence I have access to, until new evidence proves the opposite. I have no intention of doing anything else. I'm not going to change my stances based on the direction of the wind. You and Ciaran, in your posts, seem to imply that this conclusion that was reached could have been done with the snap of a finger, shrug of our shoulders, and a scratch of our armpits. That it was so obvious from the start that any kind of opposition to it is unreasonable, or that its change was a foregone conclusion. I assure you that was not the case. Many people, including non envoys and non monks, argued and scrutinised the logs, and many questions were asked about damage formulae and other aspects of multipliers. Malarious and Anelissa messaged Ieptix and asked many questions - I did as well, and I think a lot of other people did. Ianir worked with many other people to test before making these changes - I wasn't around enough to help out in that respect unfortunately. All of these were effort and work to determine what needed to be changed, and how much, and none of it was a foregone conclusion. If you expect me to take you, or anyone else, at your word without proof and a rigorous argument, you need to review your expectations.
Edit: I'd like to also qualify, most of my energy in arguments for this particular case were concentrated on the kind of changes proposed. I hotly objected, and still do object to, Malarious and Anelissa's original suggestions of a hardcap. This was early in January, around the time Reylari started making their snide comments in the combat logs thread - that was after Yarith had posted multiple logs, and some time after Anelissa had approached many others to start the discussions about what to change, and how much to change. There were multiple rounds of discussion by then. I'm not sure what you're basing your comments on when you say there were envoys who argued against the change all the way to the conclusion - but anyway, my previous paragraph still stands. I still firmly believe that the arguments and discussions were needed, and I would have it no other way.
Secondly, regarding the monk damage changes from the warrior overhaul.
I don't remember arguing to buff monk damage when the old wounding system was scrapped - I certainly don't remember any monk envoy pushing the admin for that. My memory isn't perfect, so I could have been wrong. But my impression was that it was the admin who put it in. Either way, I believe the admin did the right thing - scrapping the wounds multiplier without tweaking the damage formula would have been a supremely stupid thing to do. The tweaks ended up putting monk damage at a place we didn't want it to be, so when logs surfaced, things were adjusted downwards. What more do you want?
They didn't even fix it in a timely manner. An admin had to step in before monks obliterated Ascension
EDIT: I guess my question is...how did you not see this coming? Why was this allowed to happen? Why didn't you fix your instakills (general you) and lower damage in the many months following the switch to condensed physical afflictions (i.e. ice and some dust).
This was not a call from admin. This was a decision made by monks, then we talked to Ianir to lower the damage (we already had an envoy report up). The changes were made with direct testing in an effort to prevent issues in War and Ascension. This was not admin forcing a change, this was monks making it. I think Ianir for being willing to test with us to make tempered changes on an agreeable scale. The bleeding was calculated differently and was overlooked, it was fixed when we found the issue.
The damage changes were made by Ieptix, we were not a part of it. It was done without real discussion on the matter as compensation for loss of wounding. I had a couple times damage was high on me, but never investigated to rule out external influence, so I didn't flag it. We thought damage was a bit high, then people started reporting very high damage very early, which broke the expectation of high mo + power for high damage. Damage effects bleeding, so this meant bleeding could be crazy, although Ninjakari bleeding seemed to actually not work properly....
Anyway, we were originally not supposed to enjoy anything monk related. Which you can notice, we stopped envoying monk specific changes until Iosai later gave us an okay to envoy again. This is when we started making changes and added the damage report.
Long story short: We were told not to envoy anything monk.
I think what Veyils is seeing is non-optimized monks doing pre-nerf kata chains that have been the same for 2+ years (or longer). That brings them in line every other class, damage wise. Not even the "damage" classes (bard, pyrochem, etc), fully optimized, can just bash people to death.
I would wait until things stabilize, and the PK monks rework their katas to be less damage faceroll fall asleep at the keyboard and more build oriented.
Known Aliases: Celina/Cyndarin/Fire Jesus/The Night/That Bitch who griefed us
Since the Ninjakari envoy isn't usually around when I am(which is partially my fault since I've not had much time to play), and I can't seem to find it anywhere in the changelog or this thread, did changing monk damage also change the damage we deal to mobs, or was it just the damage against players? I asked the two people on in my guild when I was curious and neither one knew. Thanks!
Since the Ninjakari envoy isn't usually around when I am(which is partially my fault since I've not had much time to play), and I can't seem to find it anywhere in the changelog or this thread, did changing monk damage also change the damage we deal to mobs, or was it just the damage against players? I asked the two people on in my guild when I was curious and neither one knew. Thanks!
Hi, Jharen. I took over Envoy today so if you need anything, you know how to poke at me. Messages are forwarded to my cell.
I'm looking forward to the monk updates and to seeing what ends up working for all of the monk guilds as well as picking through anything else that needs to be possibly adjusted.
Comments
It's great that things, when they surface, are fixed. But I take offense when people try to make it out to have been feet-dragged, when it clearly, and demonstrably, wasn't the case. This was fixed as quickly as it could have been.
Its not that significantly higher though. They hit 1k to 1.7k combos out for the most part in early combat.
I am a warrior. That is why I said STILL PRACTICING monks. I helped bring the issue up, but I am not actually one of the ones who has to sign off. Remember my class is Minstrel.
We got some numbers and fixed things, they are bandaids till the overhaul is all.
There is a piss poor record of classes self balancing. Most won't balance until there is a giant rant on forums or admin tell them to fix it. This change was sparked by it being brought up and grabbing a couple monks to verify in testing.
Some guilds have huge issues that they just try to never fix. I won't name anyone, cause people know who they are.
If all our envoys did nerfs as often as monks did since Monkish came out, the game would have been a better place, but still be completely crazy in overhaul limbo now <.<
It's been a while, I'll be first to admit, but comparing these two and calling them equivalent is a bit of a reach.
Unless things have changed a lot, cosmic fire is just a basic attack skill and only does damage. Monk combos do damage as well as open up afflictions from momentum + bleeding. Raw damage numbers are not enough to compare them with one another.
@ how long monks have had ridiculous dmg
I thought monks have had ridiculous damage ever since that overhaul change on how damage dealt and received was calculated? The main reason it wasn't brough up on the forums sooner was because monks weren't (yet) as commonly used as other classes.
I personally remember seeing various comments regarding monk dmg from various OOC clans like Gaudi's hogwash and Halli's city clan (I forgot the name, sry halli :<) ever since October. Although it is possible these two orgs are just a bit saltier from not having their own monks yet....... Like, there was that one Glom monk who was tearing it up on deathsight, and even he admitted over various logs that he's just an alt taking advantage of EZ monk. That was, I think, October of last year? So 3 months, at least, that monk damage have been under scrutiny (not necessarily on the forums).
Accountability is necessary.
Building up discontent and dissatisfaction to yourself, and then expecting an immediate, snap change upon providing the first log?
Hey, if you want to do that, that's fine. We'll just do what we're supposed to do when it is actually brought to attention, be damned to expectations. But turning around and making snide remarks when that finally happens, rubbishing other people's efforts and making yourself out to be a victim? Yeah, sorry if I seem to have a lack of sympathy. I don't have any to spare.
The past doesn't really matter to me, who got what nerfed or who did what.
Monk damage is fairly easily handled now post-nerf. Its not that much bigger than most classes and its less than what some classes/specs can reliably do. I'm not saying monks are good or bad, just talking about damage and utility for solo or group combat.
Long story short Monks damage is easily handled if you match your resistance to their buffs. If you let them attack you non stop with 0 interruption you'll probably die. If you hinder at even a minor bit all their damage is easy to tank.
This thread is about damage so I'm basically just posting that the reduction seems to have gone quite well in making monk damage a fairly easily handled thing.
Sun ray is the highest DPS in the game.
However, making a blanket statement that no one has been watching and making use of monk damage beyond two months ago is false and misleading. It's also a bit distasteful to call everyone who have been supporting the nerf as 'playing the victim.' You, nor anyone else, have the right to use arguably overpowered abilities and then call yourself a hero for 'fixing' it.
Accountability is necessary.
EDIT: I guess my question is...how did you not see this coming? Why was this allowed to happen? Why didn't you fix your instakills (general you) and lower damage in the many months following the switch to condensed physical afflictions (i.e. ice and some dust).
The divine voice of Avechna, the Avenger reverberates powerfully, "Congratulations, Morkarion, you are the Bringer of Death indeed."
You see Estarra the Eternal shout, "Morkarion is no more! Mourn the mortal! But welcome True Ascendant Karlach, of the Realm of Death!
Every one of my posts on this thread have been reactionary to specific statements made by people in this thread. This is a statement of intent, and, by the way demonstrably provable. Every single one of my posts in this thread had a quote box in them, except for the last one, which was right after yours. Hint: I was replying to you. In all of my posts, the people I was talking about, are specifically those people quoted. Yes, that means I was referring to Maligorn in my post to him, when I wrote the sentence "delusional people thinking they are some kind of poorly treated victims of a grand conspiracy" (I assume this is the sentence that set you off about me calling other people victims). Yes, that also means I was referring to YOU (specific you, Anaklusmos, not a general you, like Maligorn's above post) when I said the following line, specifically the bolded part:
Are my statements of intent specific enough for you now? I'm referring to named people in this thread, in other words, so don't worry about me apparently making "blanket statements" about many different people not in this thread. I'm not. Ironically, I also supported a (different) nerf. Does that put me in your camp of people I'm apparently making blanket statements about? I've literally not made any blanket statements about anyone surrounding this issue, even in other threads, until people started making snide remarks about monks abusing their power.
Sure, many people have been watching monk damage - you included, apparently. No one provided logs to raise the issue - all these people who were "watching", like you (specific you, Anaklusmos) they also kept quiet. Sure, you can say you "personally could not be bothered" to contribute and bring it up because of your own preferences. That's entirely fine. But then don't blame people for not noticing the problem. What the hell am I supposed to do? Read your mind?
As a matter of fact, I obviously also fought other monks myself in that same period (like Wobou), and no, I did not notice a damage issue in how fast I died. Which, by the way, is why I was unconvinced from the first log. Which is why I defended the status quo in an argument, based on my own experience. I was unconvinced. Which by the way, is why multiple logs and extensive discussion is needed. I wasn't not going to, and will not, make that kind of change without the evidence and argument to back it up.
You can say all you want about how long ago you noticed the change etc etc. How great you are for noticing it, and how evil I am for apparently reserving some "right to use arguably overpowered abilities and then call [myself] a hero for 'fixing' it" (By the way. Tell me exactly where I called myself a hero for 'fixing it', please. Go on. Show me.) That's your right - and I have no interest in getting involved with your delusions. But yeah, do it without making literally false statements. Because, Yarith's statement (and now yours), which set me off was literally false. If you're still not sure why I reacted the way I did, here, let me help you out:
"...spend the preceding four months literally two-three hitting people while asserting that they're in a fine position..."
No, it was not four months.
No, there was no discussion with logs that I (or anyone) could have used to "assert" anything until his posts.
Edit: And unlike YOU (specific you, Anaklusmos), at least he provided logs that were integral to making the changes. As for you...
And apparently, I'm the one who is "false and misleading". Hah. Get over yourself.
Your question is partly answered above. I participated in fights myself, granted not as much as I would personally have liked over the last year, but no one raised an issue with me about my damage and when I fought with Wobou, I didn't think his damage was over the top either, on the receiving end. That is also, by the way, why I was reluctant to do a monk-wide nerf myself, and targeted Nekotai at first.
The other part of the post: Nekotai instakill was also (and hopefully still is) viable. (If that has changed, I'll be making reports to tackle that once I get enough evidence to make a case.) And lastly, most other monks probably thought the monk overhaul was coming in sooner rather than later, and did not make many changes. As a matter of fact, I did actually make a reports to lower ScorpionFury's effectiveness and change ScorpionTail in that period, and was told to wait until the overhaul (#1389, #1439). I most certainly don't blame any of the other monks for not trying to make any reports to change their primary skillsets. Read the admin verdict on my two reports, and tell me what you would have done as an envoy.
Edit: As an additional note, Yarith's first log posted (the post I quoted last page in this thread, page 5 of the "You guys really need to post more logs" thread) was on the 15 December, 2:33am, my local time (you can hover over the date to see the information, apparently). Which is UTC+8. Which means it was 6 hours (5 hours and 27 minutes, to nitpick) before the finalisation deadline of the December envoy reports. Did you expect me to make a report in 6 hours (when I wasn't even convinced yet)? The next report cycle (Jan) had a report to nerf monk damage, made without full agreement from all monk envoys. In other words, a report was made at the next available slot even without waiting for more deliberation and discussion, when one couldn't be reached.
How more "timely" do you want?
You're not an amateur combatant. Don't pretend to be one, that you don't understand that basic premise. Even affliction abilities, which can be simplified into evaluations of "This skill gives X amount of affs per Y amount of seconds", are not a simple case of "anything above this threshold is OP." Anyone making an argument to change a skill based on nothing else but affliction per second is going to invite a long hard look, and extended discussion about the nature of those afflictions. The same goes for damage, especially when we're talking about monk damage, which had (and still has, right now) multipliers based of different conditions, buffs, resistances etc etc. This isn't the first time I've demanded logs to base changes on damage from. When Arcanis made a fuss about Cantors years ago, I also repeatedly asked for logs - I'm not going to change that now.
I know what my skills do - and I wrote a long post defending the status quo in reply to Yarith's first log. I've referenced this like, five godforsaken times now. Why don't you go and read that, and see the rationale behind why it was disputed, when there were not a lot of logs to go by? Obviously, my arguments did not take into account enough factors, and were based off outdated data. Logs proved my arguments wrong, and demonstrated a need for change - and if no one brings this up for discussion, I'm not going to know.
Not sure why anyones making a big issue over the timescales.
Also, I remember when envoys successfully argued for a monk damage buff when the old wounding system was scrapped during the warrior overhaul. That's the root of the issue, really, it seems.
EDIT: Yes, I know, monks lost damage that scaled from old deepwounds.
Give me the chance to turn back time and do it again, and I assure you 100%, I will make the same arguments I did, engage the same people I did, review my arguments in light of theirs the same way I did, and dispute statements or arguments that I did not think were supported well enough. Make no mistake, as it stands, there remains no log of Ninjakari or Tahtetso damage of the same sort as the Nekotai/Shofangi logs, and there remains, right this moment, no hard evidence in the form of combat logs of Ninjakari or Tahtetso needing this change. This is a bandaid based off Nekotai/Shofangi combat logs, applied to the other monks based off a logical theory, yes. But it is still theoretical, nothing more, and if actual combat logs surface to prove that Ninjakari (or Tahtetso, or Shofangi, or even Nekotai) after these tweaks require more changes to be adjusted, be it to adjust it upwards or downwards, I most certainly will be there to advocate for those changes, and I fully expect all the envoys to do so as well, AND argue against it, as they see fit.
"Dragged kicking and screaming"? Yes, you bet I argued against the change until logs proved me wrong, and I will continue to base my arguments on evidence I have access to, until new evidence proves the opposite. I have no intention of doing anything else. I'm not going to change my stances based on the direction of the wind. You and Ciaran, in your posts, seem to imply that this conclusion that was reached could have been done with the snap of a finger, shrug of our shoulders, and a scratch of our armpits. That it was so obvious from the start that any kind of opposition to it is unreasonable, or that its change was a foregone conclusion. I assure you that was not the case. Many people, including non envoys and non monks, argued and scrutinised the logs, and many questions were asked about damage formulae and other aspects of multipliers. Malarious and Anelissa messaged Ieptix and asked many questions - I did as well, and I think a lot of other people did. Ianir worked with many other people to test before making these changes - I wasn't around enough to help out in that respect unfortunately. All of these were effort and work to determine what needed to be changed, and how much, and none of it was a foregone conclusion. If you expect me to take you, or anyone else, at your word without proof and a rigorous argument, you need to review your expectations.
Edit: I'd like to also qualify, most of my energy in arguments for this particular case were concentrated on the kind of changes proposed. I hotly objected, and still do object to, Malarious and Anelissa's original suggestions of a hardcap. This was early in January, around the time Reylari started making their snide comments in the combat logs thread - that was after Yarith had posted multiple logs, and some time after Anelissa had approached many others to start the discussions about what to change, and how much to change. There were multiple rounds of discussion by then. I'm not sure what you're basing your comments on when you say there were envoys who argued against the change all the way to the conclusion - but anyway, my previous paragraph still stands. I still firmly believe that the arguments and discussions were needed, and I would have it no other way.
Secondly, regarding the monk damage changes from the warrior overhaul.
I don't remember arguing to buff monk damage when the old wounding system was scrapped - I certainly don't remember any monk envoy pushing the admin for that. My memory isn't perfect, so I could have been wrong. But my impression was that it was the admin who put it in. Either way, I believe the admin did the right thing - scrapping the wounds multiplier without tweaking the damage formula would have been a supremely stupid thing to do. The tweaks ended up putting monk damage at a place we didn't want it to be, so when logs surfaced, things were adjusted downwards. What more do you want?
This was not a call from admin. This was a decision made by monks, then we talked to Ianir to lower the damage (we already had an envoy report up). The changes were made with direct testing in an effort to prevent issues in War and Ascension. This was not admin forcing a change, this was monks making it. I think Ianir for being willing to test with us to make tempered changes on an agreeable scale. The bleeding was calculated differently and was overlooked, it was fixed when we found the issue.
The damage changes were made by Ieptix, we were not a part of it. It was done without real discussion on the matter as compensation for loss of wounding. I had a couple times damage was high on me, but never investigated to rule out external influence, so I didn't flag it. We thought damage was a bit high, then people started reporting very high damage very early, which broke the expectation of high mo + power for high damage. Damage effects bleeding, so this meant bleeding could be crazy, although Ninjakari bleeding seemed to actually not work properly....
Anyway, we were originally not supposed to enjoy anything monk related. Which you can notice, we stopped envoying monk specific changes until Iosai later gave us an okay to envoy again. This is when we started making changes and added the damage report.
Long story short: We were told not to envoy anything monk.
Is Karlach's comment in regards to sap?
The divine voice of Avechna, the Avenger reverberates powerfully, "Congratulations, Morkarion, you are the Bringer of Death indeed."
You see Estarra the Eternal shout, "Morkarion is no more! Mourn the mortal! But welcome True Ascendant Karlach, of the Realm of Death!
I would wait until things stabilize, and the PK monks rework their katas to be less damage faceroll fall asleep at the keyboard and more build oriented.
I'm looking forward to the monk updates and to seeing what ends up working for all of the monk guilds as well as picking through anything else that needs to be possibly adjusted.