Melee Classes

[Aelith]

Hey. So i've been hearing around these forums how monk/war will out damage drk/anything. Is this true? I don't see why SE would include a melee class that just isn't up to par with another, or doesn't have some decent advantage...

My high level playing experience is non existent on both of these classes, so I thought you guys might be able to help me out. Is it true that a monk will consistently outdamage a dark knight at his own specialty? What do drks have that you guys wish you had - what do you have that they just don't get?

[viras]

I think S-E intended for all of the jobs to have their uses and IMO there isn't one job class that is utterly useless. SOme excel better than others against certain enemies. But overall pts are not gonna be entirely bad because of a certain job. Though I'm biased, I think MNKs do great DMG.

[iglak]

monks are pure melee, nothing else. we specialize in dealing melee damage.

darknights are a lot of heavy hit melee with some enfeebling and damaging magic.

since DRKs are not pure melee dmg dealers, MNKs will always outdamage DRKs when equally well equipped, if all the DRK does is melee (except maybe on something blunt dmg is weak to and cutting dmg is strong to). however, DRKs bring a lot of extra dmg in when they use their spells efficiently, and the Absorb-stat line of spells helps the entire party deal damage, as well as increasing the DRK's dmg.

[2.0]

All things being equal, all melees are equal. It's equipment and skill that makes the difference.

[Aelith]

You see - i don't buy that every melle class is equal if the eqipment and skill behind them are equal. To me, that sounds like saying that a taru blm is equal to a hume blm, when they are both equally skilled and equipped. Now, its certainly true that both can do the job adaquately . The hume blm won't be hurting his party at all, and will get everything done that needs to be done in 99% of cases. That said, the taru blm is still better at what he does - it just doesn't really tend to matter in end. Like I said though, i'm not high level in any melee class, so if I'm completely wrong here and you can show why everyone is equal, i'd be interested in hearing it.

Now iglak's idea i'm more in line with. I didn't think much about the drks magic role when comparing him to the monk, and that could certainly help explain things. Thanks for pointing that out.

[greysenn]

Not every class is equal in all areas, they all have other roles they can fill than "just damage." Thats where the balance comes from. If you don't have the pure damage of some other class, I assure you that you'll make it up somewhere else.

I could expand on this, but there is a million other posts on each class board explaining what they do well.

[2.0]

Are they equal in the sense that they do the exact same damage all the time? No.

Are they equal in the sense that what one can't do another can and vice versa thus balancing the classes out so that one isn't that much more powerful than the other? Yes.

[iglak]

Originally posted by 2.0
Are they equal in the sense that they do the exact same damage all the time? No.

i thought this is what you were saying at first. and like you and everyone else, i disagree with this comment.

Are they equal in the sense that what one can't do another can and vice versa thus balancing the classes out so that one isn't that much more powerful than the other? Yes.

now this i definitely agree with.
DRK's don't do more melee dmg than MNKs. but they cast their Absorb-stat line of spells to increase the entire party's damage, as well as increasing their own damage. they cast Aspir and Drain, trying to keep their MP and HP high while lowering the enemy's. with a nearly capped elemental skill, they can magic burst off of their own skillchains for very good added damage.
a DRK's melee damage will always be worse than a MNK's of equal skill and relatively equal equipment, but they make up for it with everything else that they do.

[Rising Tornado]

The hume blm won't be hurting his party at all, and will get everything done that needs to be done in 99% of cases. That said, the taru blm is still better at what he does - it just doesn't really tend to matter in end

well.. here we are comparing the same job played by two different races. the taru BLM isnt necessarily better at what he does, that is entirely up to the player behind the mage.
where the taru has the advantage is in his (or her) native racial MP bonus. but just having a larger pool of MP with which to cast spells does not make him better at what he does.


when we compare something such as the damage output between two different jobs, we have a larger set of variables.
clearly, the skill and quality of the player theselves is the number one factor in how "good" either job is.
there is also the racial factor, where one might simply be stronger than another.

apart from the fact that dark knights bring much more than plain physical damage to the table, one characteristic of the job that i have often heard spoken about (in discussions like this about which is the "better" damage dealer) is that the difference in the nature of the damage dealt is pronounced.

i've not played a DRK before, so i'm not speaking with authority on this, but what i most often see people saying, when comparing damage between dark knights and monks is that a dark knight will have let's say 3 misses and one big hit for 100 points of damage.
this gains the awe of the other party members at the big number they see.
while the monk will perhaps more consistently hit a 30, 40, 32, 38, 36 in the same amount of time.
this goes unnoticed because the monk isnt producing large damage numbers on the screen, but they are arguably out-damaging (or at the very least, absolutely on par with) the dark knight.

i will not get into the debate about which is a "better" damage dealer, because i too believe that SE must have put enough thought into the design and balance of the game so as not to make any one class worthless.

my own opinions on the issue are simply that a well-played DRK and a well-played MNK can be equal damage dealers, though each contributes their damage in their own unique way.


on your last question, though, i'd really have to say that DRK doesnt have anything i wish i had. i'm not much of a fan of the DRK as a job, it doesnt appeal to me (hence the reason i dont play one), and i havent always been impressed by many of the players i've encountered behind the DRKs ive met.
i'll try not to make any stereotypes, as i know that there are good and skilled DRKs out there who im sure do a fine job.

that said, i also have to say that i didnt choose monk instead of dark knight anymore than i chose monk instead of anything else. i wasnt looking to play a damage dealer and then decide "i dont want to play a DRK, so what else can i be?".
i chose monk simply because i liked the idea of it, before i even got the game ^^.