Devs: A Monk front-facing combo. (Positional Requirement)

Before:
BS > TS > SP (Back + Flank combo)
Bootshine 150 Potency + crit if from behind
Truestrike 190 Potency (Back)
Snap Punch 180 Potency (Flank)


After:
BS > TS > SP (Back + Flank combo)
Bootshine 150 Potency + crit if from behind
Truestrike 190 Potency (Back)
Snap Punch 180 Potency (Flank)

BS > TS > SP (Frontal combo)
Bootshine 150 Potency + crit 50% chance if from front
Truestrike 170 Potency (Front)
Snap Punch 160 Potency (Front)


It's not game breaking, and not hard to implement. Incentive to attack from behind remains as the priority, but gives you an option for the front.

A front combo would mean monks will need tank accuracy to not miss.
I don't think that will be very well received.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CGMidlander

A front combo would mean monks will need tank accuracy to not miss.
I don't think that will be very well received.

---

Nah their point is that monks should suffer in late game content that, and i emphasize, they are not INTERESTED IN at all. We should all risking their lifes attacking from the front to satisfy their own burning desire to use it in non-end game content.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Akamu_Aniketos

Your opinions are mainly towards coil, I played up to T4 last year and my interest in coil is not there, so I don't even bother playing it unless someone needs help and I happen to be able to help.


I'm not a coil player. You don't have an off tank in all cases.

---

Qantum of selfishness?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Akamu_Aniketos

Before:
BS > TS > SP (Back combo)
Bootshine 150 Potency + crit if from behind
Truestrike 190 Potency (back)
Snap Punch 180 Potency (back)


After:
BS > TS > SP (Back combo)
Bootshine 150 Potency + crit if from behind
Truestrike 190 Potency (back)
Snap Punch 180 Potency (back)

BS > TS > SP (Front combo)
Bootshine 150 Potency + crit 50% chance if from front
Truestrike 170 Potency (front)
Snap Punch 160 Potency (front)

It's not game breaking, and not hard to implement. Incentive to attack from behind remains as the priority, but gives you an option for the front.

---

Sorry but this would hurt the Monk community, not help. The second a MNK dies from Mountain buster everyone is going to ask why they were in front instead of behind.

i will be blunt, i don't think monk need a front combo... but one combo without positional recquirement.
i'm almost amazed as no one did notice that the monk feel more like a rogue and the actual rogue feel like a monk.

the monk don't need to have position he will simply crush the enemy with him power, he don't look for tactics or stuff like this. so far at my eyes, the monk is not a monk, but more a true assassin or rogue class that will fight the enemy from side and back... when the monk must be focus on more complexe combo without relaying on the position. but well...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dyvid

Sorry but this would hurt the Monk community, not help. The second a MNK dies from Mountain buster everyone is going to ask why they were in front instead of behind.

---

Did you even look at the values? Having a weaker combo that you can perform from the front doesn't mean everyone will automatically attack from the front.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by silentwindfr

i will be blunt, i don't think monk need a front combo... but one combo without positional recquirement.
i'm almost amazed as no one did notice that the monk feel more like a rogue and the actual rogue feel like a monk.

---

I wouldn't mind that instead of a front combo, but how would you go about doing this?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by silentwindfr

i will be blunt, i don't think monk need a front combo... but one combo without positional recquirement.
i'm almost amazed as no one did notice that the monk feel more like a rogue and the actual rogue feel like a monk.

---

Before the positional requirements were installed my first thought was "I am turning into a THIEF now??" "Why??" and this was over 3 years ago. A lot of people who play Monk over look this and just accept things for the way that they are and it's sad to see.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by silentwindfr

the monk don't need to have position he will simply crush the enemy with him power, he don't look for tactics or stuff like this. so far at my eyes, the monk is not a monk, but more a true assassin or rogue class that will fight the enemy from side and back... when the monk must be focus on more complexe combo without relaying on the position. but well...

---

EXACTLY how I think about it. Monks should be a POWERFUL force from ALL angles!

I don't remember any other game where I could fight with my fists; where my strength lies ONLY from attacking the back and sides of a mob, that's ridiculous to me. In FFXI thief's were much weaker then Monks so they had to use trick attack's and sneak attack's from the back or behind a party member for DEEP damage bursts, so it made perfect sense since they were weaker per blow. And it wasn't a big deal either because it was just 2 skills, and hell I actually thought THAT was fun, but for Monks, no. Monks should not play like thief's.

I don't mind complexity either, they could make even more complicated combos and I would like that. But being bound to heavily rely on said positions is what I don't find fun at all because it doesn't feel like I'm playing as a Monk, but as a Rogue.

Well... martial arts (at least the Kung fu I took) there are optimal places to land a strike on a target to do damage. It changes based on the kind of attack. How they translate that into the game is positional requirements.

Example, razor kick (with the side of the foot) not really something effective on thigh, targets are side/back of the knee and soft tissue.

Throws, holds, and sparring was most effective when getting around someone's defense, approaching from the front was far from optimal because you have lots more defense that way

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spartan117

Qantum of selfishness?

---

As a coil elitist, please educate me on what you mean when you insult me and how I prefer to play the game.

Here is the point:

If you give the MNK a decreased penalty for not being in position, you decrease the skill needed to be effective as the class. In addition, if you decrease said penalty, you are also making the class a more powerful class OVERALL.

If you are tanking mobs, YOU ARE MEANT TO GET KILLED. This is a cooperative game, MNK ABSOLUTELY should NOT get abilities that allow them to go outside of the scope of their archetype. If you were able to be viable as a tank, then the would need to make BLMs, SMNs, DRGs, and NINs all able to have the same viability. This would decrease the need for an actual tank. The frontal potencies are fine as they are.

This is the main point OP is ignoring in other's posts. It simply makes them too powerful, the reason you shouldn't get the ability to do more damage from the front is because it makes you too strong. That's like saying, "As a PLD, I feel like I should get a buff to my healing potency! What if my healer dies, how will I stay alive? This happens all the time!"

/thread

Post Script:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Akamu_Aniketos

I don't remember any other game where I could fight with my fists; where my strength lies ONLY from attacking the back and sides of a mob, that's ridiculous to me.

---

I've played several where all melee classes had an increased chance to miss their attacks because they were attacking from the front.

Just so you know, you are coming off as hard-headed - accusing other people of not understanding your points while totally ignoring valid concerns with this proposed change.