Monk v.s. Warrior

[cd288]

Originally Posted by Vexenu [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

With or without a Fungi, a Human is faster if you know what you're doing. People underestimate the impact of a 20% XP penalty and overestimate the practical benefit of Regen. A few extra standing Regen per tick (which is what matters, not sitting Regen, because you're bandaging to 75% between kills, not sitting) is not enough of an advantage for the Iksar to kill 5 mobs for every 4 the Human kills. That's also assuming non-stop killing, which is rarely the case when soloing anyway (indeed, people solo a Monk largely to avoid the frenetic, non-stop pace of pulling for an XP group).

In 50-60 you're not killing 5 mobs nonstop for every 4. But an Iksar can definitely killing faster overall with less downtime and every minute is critical if you're talking about leveling speed from 50-60 given how long that stretch takes. You will absolutely level faster as an Iksar (assuming same type of gear as the Human Monk has) from 50-60. If you're just chilling and soloing randomly and don't care about getting to 60, then yeah the earlier levels the Iksar regen just isn't going to make as much of a difference, but 50-60 is where you will level faster as Iksar.

[Philistine]

Originally Posted by questever [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If I choose monk, its going to be human 100%

However I have another predicament. i'm wondering if I should even twink the warrrior/monk because it would be gear dependent and I wouldnt fully understand the class and will look like a fool at higher levels in groups due to inexperience.

Should I just save my plat or just twink the shit out of my char?

Imho it's worth at least getting a low budget EC weapon. Evem a 100pp weapon make a *huge* difference over starter or self-found weapons.

And don't sweat screwing up or looking a little silly in groups or raids - someone who is new to the game or the class is awesome! Most people are happy to explain stuff if you ask or are express uncertainty - if you happen to come across someone prickly (the forums are full of them!) just don't sweat it.

As for your initial question, I've heard (i dont have one) twinked monks are a blast to level, whereas I found my warrior frustrating to level. That said, the payoff for warriors is very worth it if you're going to gear them up at 60, imho.

[Vexenu]

Originally Posted by cd288 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

In 50-60 you're not killing 5 mobs nonstop for every 4. But an Iksar can definitely killing faster overall with less downtime and every minute is critical if you're talking about leveling speed from 50-60 given how long that stretch takes. You will absolutely level faster as an Iksar (assuming same type of gear as the Human Monk has) from 50-60. If you're just chilling and soloing randomly and don't care about getting to 60, then yeah the earlier levels the Iksar regen just isn't going to make as much of a difference, but 50-60 is where you will level faster as Iksar.

As I said, you're underestimating the impact of a 20% XP penalty and overestimating the impact of a few extra points of standing regen. Monk soloing is about finding a low blue mob you can reliably kill losing about 50% of your health, bandaging back up to 75% and repeating. If you're sitting around to get full advantage of Iksar regen, you're doing it wrong. And in that case, you're also soloing slowly enough that the Human XP advantage on a per-kill basis would be even more pronounced. People are too caught on the regen numbers on paper rather than in real-world scenarios. Monks are not Necros or Shaman. They don't get the same efficiency returns that those classes do from extra regen because they don't solo the same way.

All that being said, more regen is ALWAYS better than less, and a level 60 Iksar is indisputably the statistical min/max superior choice to a Human (although their FashionQuest is far inferior). But you're deluding yourself if you think the Iksar levels faster due to regen. They really don't.

[Jimjam]

Okay, that is an interesting point. I’m gonna pull out some Dirty Simple Maths.

So at sonic bat levels (51-54), iksar is 4hp/tick better standing. It takes about 2 mins to kill a bat, 80 extra hp healed i.e. a single bandage. It takes 10 seconds to do a bandage to make up that difference.

My DSM suggests to get the same xp and make up regen difference, iksar has to spend 12 mins (6 bats), human spends 10mins 50 (5 bats and bandages)- the human levels faster accounting for diminished regen using bandages. I have a bunch of other thoughts but want to be brief.

[Vexenu]

Yes, that's the right way of thinking about it. Or put another way (using your numbers):

Time to kill a bat is two minutes or 120 seconds. The Iksar must kill 20% more bats to earn the same XP as the Human, so we can say that to earn the same amount of XP, the Human takes 120 seconds of combat while the Iksar takes 144 seconds (120*1.2). In exchange for this penalty, the Iksar receives 80 standing regen over that 120 second period, or about the same as is healed with a single bandage taking 10 seconds to apply. So the Human can kill the mob and apply the extra bandage to end up with the same HP and XP as the Iksar in 130s total, while the Iksar takes 144s to achieve the same HP and XP value.

People will say, "Well maybe so, but the Iksar Regen is much higher when sitting," but this is irrelevant, because you're better off bandaging than sitting, and if you're sitting for long periods between mobs your regen rate is not the limiting factor on your XP, it's your kill rate (i.e. imagine you're only killing one mob per hour, the Iksar Regen is obviously useless at that point and the XP penalty becomes much more apparent).

tl;dr Iksars are statistically superior to Human Monks but they look like shit and level slower.

[PatChapp]

The bats are a great example really
Lots of monks that solo do it in sol b from 50-60. Bandages are readily available 1 zone away. Human can kill just as many bats or ldcs in a cycle as an iksar limited more by spawns than regen

[Duik]

Jimjam says...

Okay, that is an interesting point. I’m gonna pull out some Dirty Simple Maths.

Best Quote Ever.

[cd288]

Originally Posted by Vexenu [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Yes, that's the right way of thinking about it. Or put another way (using your numbers):

Time to kill a bat is two minutes or 120 seconds. The Iksar must kill 20% more bats to earn the same XP as the Human, so we can say that to earn the same amount of XP, the Human takes 120 seconds of combat while the Iksar takes 144 seconds (120*1.2). In exchange for this penalty, the Iksar receives 80 standing regen over that 120 second period, or about the same as is healed with a single bandage taking 10 seconds to apply. So the Human can kill the mob and apply the extra bandage to end up with the same HP and XP as the Iksar in 130s total, while the Iksar takes 144s to achieve the same HP and XP value.

People will say, "Well maybe so, but the Iksar Regen is much higher when sitting," but this is irrelevant, because you're better off bandaging than sitting, and if you're sitting for long periods between mobs your regen rate is not the limiting factor on your XP, it's your kill rate (i.e. imagine you're only killing one mob per hour, the Iksar Regen is obviously useless at that point and the XP penalty becomes much more apparent).

tl;dr Iksars are statistically superior to Human Monks but they look like shit and level slower.

You're assuming that bandages are available your entire playing session. Highly depends on where you spend all your solo time. Unless you're always 100% fully stocked on bandages to the extent that you can just nonstop kill by bind wounding to 75% and then regenning then it's not really relevant.

[Vexenu]

If you don't have bandages available then you shouldn't be soloing a Monk. It's not hard to carry around a couple of bags full of them, especially if you're intending to mostly solo. And you can buy them everywhere. "What if you don't have bandages?" is just a silly argument in favor of Iksar. It's like saying, "Well, sorry but your Mage is useless if you don't have malachite!" Which is true. But malachite, along with bandages, are incredibly cheap and easily acquired. With basic foresight and planning you need never be without them. You might as well argue that Iksar is better because they can forage while Humans are at risk of starvation if they forget to buy food.

[Jimjam]

Originally Posted by cd288 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You're assuming that bandages are available your entire playing session. Highly depends on where you spend all your solo time. Unless you're always 100% fully stocked on bandages to the extent that you can just nonstop kill by bind wounding to 75% and then regenning then it's not really relevant.

Always stocked on bandages, food and blast heals!