Monk Supremacy

What game are you playing? Certainly not EQ....

Monks dominate (with a few outliers here or there, but consistently its always monks) till at BEST SoD (Which is when Necros start to take off). During RoF is when Wizards start to take off big too. Mages will now forever suck with the Shock of Many nerf and will never be a top tier DPS again.

A simple fix to monks would be the best solution because monks don't just out shine Rogues, they out shine just about every other pure DPS class in the game. It's just that other melee classes can tank or have some useful utility that Rogues don't. Rogues get hit the hardest. I feel like Rangers are literally better than Rogues at stealth before SoS (which is not classic). Reason being Rangers can move in invis at SoW speed, and if they encounter a mob that has see invis, they can lull. They can also invis their entire group. Rogues on the other hand invis isn't even that useful because so many mobs have the ability to see through Rogue's hide/sneak before SoS, which again isn't classic.

I'll never understand these arguments. Imagine telling someone who is playing Classic WoW and upset that Ret Paladins are bad that they shouldn't complain because in 15 expansions Ret Paladins are actually OP. It literally doesn't make sense.

This the TLP sub forum, not the version-of-the-game-almost-no-one-plays version of the game. Most EverQuest players actively tell people who are curious about what real EQ was like to avoid retail EQ for a reason. It's only EverQuest in name.

That's a poor argument because every class, including Rogue, will have to pull in at least half the groups they join. In fact, that's usually the only way a Rogue gets a group. They need a puller and there's no monks LFG. But also no one has sympathy for this because if you make a Monk you know you have to pull. This is on par with having sympathy for someone making a Cleric and being upset when they find out that they're the main healer in the group because they wanted to nuke instead. If that's what you wanted, then you chose the wrong class.

It's far more than just that. In classic EQ, monk fists are so good that they are basically dual wielding Mithril 2 Handers. By the time Kunark comes out and they get their epics, their fists have the best ratios in the game, and they won't be able to get a weapon that will actually increase their damage until Plane of Time.

Imagine the idea of a Rogue using a single 15/25 epic during Kunark while monks are dual wielding 23/26 fists with quadruple attack. Like there's no chance the Rogue can compete. I've literally parsed this before as someone who had the most geared Rogue on Mischief during the relative time period. It's fantasy to suggest otherwise, and simple math can easily prove this.

Well that's not true.
Many seem to forget that bare handed fists (monk or otherwise) have no dmg bonus, but actual weapons do - and dmg bonus is not reduced by MotM.

Kunark: Bo Staff of Trorsmang from Nexona is marginally better than epic fists (more so vs MotM targets).

Velious: Gharn's Rock of Smashing from Vulak'Aerr and Fist of Nature from Tunare are both plain better than epic fists when used in main hand, but slightly worse in offhand.

Luclin: Fangs of Vyzh'dra from Vyzh'dra the Cursed is even better (marginally better than epic fists in offhand also) and
Caen's Bo Staff of Fury from Emperor Ssraeshza is slightly better than Trorsmang (but both weaker than any of the H2H weapons).

This is without counting any procs (natural from weapon and/or from added augments).
Also, Iksar monks (bare hands being 1 delay slower than human monks) have more to gain from upgrading to one of these weapons, but humans will also gain from them over epic fists.


edit: You can also get Fist of Lightning from Eashen of the Sky in Velious. It is for offhand only, but slightly worse than epic fists (41% haste might make it worth it though).

Most are, many aren't.

I wish EQ had a readily available breakdown for class playtime for a given TLP by expansion, would be very interesting, though less useful given the repetitiveness of TLP and stability of live. (As in, we all know when monks are supreme).

Despite GW2 having this:

https://gw2wingman.nevermindcreations.de/popularity

There are certain classes (aka professions) that are ridiculously unpopular. Seeing that figure for the first time in around a year and seeing my favorite specialization, weaver, still at a ludicrously low 1% is depressing. It generally means the only people playing it are die hards or those that don't know better.

Just looking at the title, I feel like there should be a good rock video about this.

That aside, I suppose monks do have 1 penalty. They might be brokenly op, but omgosh are they boring. I could only get one to low 40s.

Haha, yeah you're not playing the same game as the rest of us. From classic and for 15 expansions monks are on the top. Wizards get one expansion where they are competitive but not better. Rangers get one expansion too. Then it's back to monk dominance without anyone touching them.

Even when wiz/ranger have their one expansions, monks still beat them most of the time. Only during trueshot will rangers win and that's an hour long recast. Wizards are so bad both before and after their one expansion that nobody bothers to play them anyway. Even so, on Mischief I didn't see a wizard on top until an exceptionally played one joined our guild in UF.

I would rather have 6 mages than 6 monks.

With 6 mages. You get decent dps. AAA+ burst. And 6 pretty solid tanks, each with S tier procs like Air Pet Stun(tm).

So if we are talking path of least resistance.... monk isn't it.

Also none of those mages need to buy a single piece of gear to do all of that and ....

Chain pets.

I suggest reconsidering your argument. I'm not contesting the fact that Monks aren't among the top percentile of damage dealers. What I'm asserting is that Monks don't maintain dominance across 15 expansions. This is supported by evidence with a quick search. I've personally witnessed the performance of a Best in Slot (BiS) Monk on Aradune from its inception to the current CoTF era.

Numerous discussions on this platform highlight instances where Wizards, Rangers, and even Rogues can outperform Monks in terms of Damage Per Second & overall Damage Done if equipped with BiS gear from Luclin to Omens. As you progress beyond Omens (GoD and beyond), Berserkers and Necromancers can also join the ranks of top damage dealers, (for Necromancers) particularly in encounters that demand mobility. From DoDH, until about SoF/Seeds its really encounter dependant.

That said, the pertinent question isn't whether one plays EQ, but rather, if you've engaged in EQ raiding beyond Velious? Have you competitively participated in the first 15 expansions where raid gear holds equivalent significance? Because based on my experience, over the last 5-6 expansions since CoTF, Necromancers and Wizards have indisputably dominated the damage charts, relegating Monks to a third-place position.

According to the AMA, no, they are not considering balancing lower expansions. They don't care about the TLP experience, and if they find that on live monks are too weak their "fix" for balancing live could make TLP monks even stronger.

From a necro perspective, I only found monks overpowered during the 70s era. Before and after that I found I could hang with them or beat them depending on the encounter.

Making monks cry is one of my favorite past times. Maybe I will do it again on teek or maybe I will enter the EQ retirement home and play a monk so I can be lazy and wheel chair race with the other monks.

Me and most of my friends actively tell people to avoid TLP servers if they've never played EQ before

That's funny. If anyone is looking to try EQ for the first time or pick it up again after a looong exodus, I always tell them to wait for the next TLP release or join the latest TLP. A relatively fresh TLP with a little guidance is a fun MMO experience almost immediately. If you're on live and don't set up a premade group to level with, it's pretty terrible until you get to current content, which might take 100+ hours for many people. It's like:

1. Sit there and do nothing while I spend 40 hours powerleveling you on live
2. Spend a few days and a hundred $ setting up a decent 3 boxing setup and then level to current year over 80 hours
3. Grind in solo misery for 200 hours on even a grind-friendly class
4. Roll on a fresh TLP with almost any character and be likely to find a group easily for any level range

I mean no offense, but this statement carries the same level of subjectivity as the initial post.

I support Code-Zero's perspective. In my opinion - EverQuest's Live servers offer a superior experience for new players, allowing them to explore without being surrounded by thousands of others eager to rush to max level and raid. They can take their time and truly savor the game, especially if they start with friends to accompany them on their journey. In my view, the bullet points you've provided are detrimental to any newcomer.

That's a good point! A player who wants to experience a MMO on their own without the disruption of other players is definitely better served by leveling on live. They'll be free from other players for hundreds of hours until they get near level cap, and will be rewarded with many opportunities to learn self-sufficiency as they start encountering increasingly harder content.

Totally gimping myself early - but I’m using 3 rogues for my DPS early on.

Monks are ideal min/max by an unreasonable margin for many expansions. It isn’t even close.

That said, I’d rather see a bump for Rogues in 1-70 damage calculations versus a monk nerf.

This makes sense. TLP is nothing about original eq and its just a rush to min/max krono fest.
On live, there are all the resources and they can play around to learn stuff without getting perma trained cause they are in someones way.

How do we get DPG to take this seriously?

Here are some ideas:

1. Start a petition
2. Picket outside their office
3. Send handwritten letters to Jennifer Chan
4. Start a gofundme to pay the salary of a contract developer who will do the balancing for them

I'll donate my time and some money toward whichever approach the community wants to pursue.