Monk Identity and Blitz ?

Just out of shear curiosity. If SAM had it's current kit, and included 6 positionals. And MNK had it's current kit with 2 positionals...would you still play MNK if you're gratification solely came from positional style gameplay as most are saying it does.

Would you play SAM if it had it's current kit, and had 6 positionals. Identity aside...just the rules of the job.

Would you find SAM a better design job?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sqwall

Just out of shear curiosity. If SAM had it's current kit, and included 6 positionals. And MNK had it's current kit with 2 positionals...would you still play MNK if you're gratification solely came from positional style gameplay as most are saying it does.

Would you play SAM if it had it's current kit, and had 6 positionals. Identity aside...just the rules of the job.

Would you find SAM a better design job?

---

I know where this is going, but you miss way too much points to ask a smart question like this.

Of course, any melee would be somehow more enjoyable to play with more positionals. Nothing is more boring than stay half afk while playing 123. I would even vote for range-depended DPS on MCH / DNC / BRD to actually make use of their movement.

But there is still a gap between MNK and SAM. MNK´s whole kit fits well together. You´re fast, you´ve straight combo actions with low buff durations and nothing breaks this movement chain. You are always in movement, it´s just a well-rounded design. SAM on the other hand has long buff durations and the rotation would break with any midare or higabana. It would never feel so smooth to play.

That said, i´d welcome more positionals on SAM, but i would welcome it way more, if SAM would be adjusted to the positionals with lower durations and midare as off-gcd or positional-based without a castbar. But on the other hand, as long as MNK has it´s core and 6 positionals, we don´t need a MNK 2.0 with a katana. If anything i want TRUE-MNK back with fists of wind. More speed is always welcome.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ssunny2008

I know where this is going, but you miss way too much points to ask a smart question like this.

Of course, any melee would be somehow more enjoyable to play with more positionals. Nothing is more boring than stay half afk while playing 123. I would even vote for range-depended DPS on MCH / DNC / BRD to actually make use of their movement.

But there is still a gap between MNK and SAM. MNK´s whole kit fits well together. You´re fast, you´ve straight combo actions with low buff durations and nothing breaks this movement chain. You are always in movement, it´s just a well-rounded design. SAM on the other hand has long buff durations and the rotation would break with any midare or higabana. It would never feel so smooth to play.

That said, i´d welcome more positionals on SAM, but i would welcome it way more, if SAM would be adjusted to the positionals with lower durations and midare as off-gcd or positional-based without a castbar. But on the other hand, as long as MNK has it´s core and 6 positionals, we don´t need a MNK 2.0 with a katana. If anything i want TRUE-MNK back with fists of wind. More speed is always welcome.

---

You didn't answer the question.
The question was: Would you play SAM if it had it's current kit, and had 6 positionals. Idenity aside...just the rules of the job.

I didn't ask to change the job to fit how it would work for you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ssunny2008

Of course, any melee would be somehow more enjoyable to play with more positionals. Nothing is more boring than stay half afk while playing 123. I would even vote for range-depended DPS on MCH / DNC / BRD to actually make use of their movement. B

---

So by this logic tanks are boring to play sense they have no positionals. Are you suggesting to spice things up a bit that the Main Tank needs to hit a flank every once in a while?

And Ranged is just as boring to play as it should incorporate movement for range-movement style DPS.

Somehow I doubt the r.DPS would like to be constantly moving to do damage. Having to sit at max range to rDPS or something like that would be a raid design nightmare.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sqwall

You didn't answer the question.
The question was: Would you play SAM if it had it's current kit, and had 6 positionals. Idenity aside...just the rules of the job.

I didn't ask to change the job to fit how it would work for you.

---

If you can´t interprete "Melees would be more enjoyable to play with more positionals." as "I would play SAM.", then i don´t know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sqwall

Somehow I doubt the r.DPS would like to be constantly moving to do damage. Having to sit at max range to rDPS or something like that would be a raid design nightmare.

---

I'd welcome context sensitive commands, and having it based on distance would take advantage of Range mobility and give them a unique game goal to work for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kabooa

I'd welcome context sensitive commands, and having it based on distance would take advantage of Range mobility and give them a unique game goal to work for.

---

Sure. In a perfect world were the boss never moves, or the AOE stack marker isn't 15 yalms away, or you're baiting aoe and moving, or you're moving to the center of arena for a knockback to outer edge, or stacking under a boss for a donut aoe, or half the freaking arena is deleted an your forced to stand in a spot out of max range.

That would be a pretty boring raid if it were design with max range dps in mind....might was well just forget trying to hit max range every time.

Sounds unrealistic, and a nightmare to achieve

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sqwall

Sure. In a perfect world were the boss never moves, or the AOE stack marker isn't 15 yalms away, or you're baiting aoe and moving, or you're moving to the center of arena for a knockback to outer edge, or stacking under a boss for a donut aoe, or half the freaking arena is deleted an your forced to stand in a spot out of max range.

That would be a pretty boring raid if it were design with max range dps in mind....might was well just forget trying to hit max range every time.

Sounds unrealistic, and a nightmare to achieve

---

I can literally do it in every single encounter we've had. So what's the problem?

At worst, it means I have a quick minigame of determining whether to delay or to unleash.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sqwall

Just out of shear curiosity. If SAM had it's current kit, and included 6 positionals. And MNK had it's current kit with 2 positionals...would you still play MNK if you're gratification solely came from positional style gameplay as most are saying it does.

Would you play SAM if it had it's current kit, and had 6 positionals. Identity aside...just the rules of the job.

Would you find SAM a better design job?

---

let us think about this in a more deep manner, for a moment... Samurai has two positional requirements. Kasha at flank and Gecko at rear...
Let us add four positional requirements, then. Shifu at flank, Jinpu at Rear, YukiKaze at rear, and.. hmn... how about Hissatsu: Seigan at flank?

now, then... Samurai with six positional requirements.

Would you play this? would Sunny? would I? I would still play Samurai, since Samurai would not be more difficult because of this, in my opinion...
To be honest, I would not even care much.. and just hit the positional requirements, while in the case of hissatsu: Seigan... If you imagine that being its potency 220 and potency 250 on positional...I just raised the skill ceiling, with no impact at all on the skill floor, since many Samurai players do not even use Third Eye, let alone Hissatsu: Seigan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anahlise_Auhn_Giinslai

let us think about this in a more deep manner, for a moment... Samurai has two positional requirements. Kasha at flank and Gecko at rear...
Let us add four positional requirements, then. Shifu at flank, Jinpu at Rear, YukiKaze at rear, and.. hmn... how about Hissatsu: Seigan at flank?

now, then... Samurai with six positional requirements.

Would you play this? would Sunny? would I? I would still play Samurai, since Samurai would not be more difficult because of this, in my opinion...
To be honest, I would not even care much.. and just hit the positional requirements, while in the case of hissatsu: Seigan... If you imagine that being its potency 220 and potency 250 on positional...I just raised the skill ceiling, with no impact at all on the skill floor, since many Samurai players do not even use Third Eye, let alone Hissatsu: Seigan.

---

This build still has fixed positionals with no mixup barely implementing the movement that makes Monk fun. Half the joy to monk for me is the dancing and weaving between flank and rear and having that movement be a core part to the class.

That current setup has positionals, but just cycles "rear combo" " flank combo" "rear combo" repeat. Monk has a fun dynamic where in one cycle you go flank flank rear // rear rear flank // flank rear flank. You don't just sit in one position which makes the class rely on movement making the cookie cutter rotation have a bit more depth to it