User talk:Isaiah Cartwright/Overpowered Skills/Monk/Archive 1

Shield of Regeneration

Kills split game way too much. Recharge is too low, given that sin combos occur greater than every 5 seconds. I think a lower execution time of 1/4 sec makes sense, given how fast sins can attack - but the recharge does not make sense to me. Lengthen recharge to 8-12 seconds (closer to the duration) to prevent it from being spammed everywhere and instead used carefully on single targets. --Black mischief 02:41, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah I'm suprized how much 1c -> .25c cast made such a difference here, I always felt the 15e was the main limiting factor but it's getting a lot of use because of the low recharge, I hate the fact one character can hold off so many with this skill. We can't have lower then .75 execute time due to the way our animations work, we can have higher but not lower, in the end I agree a slightly higher recharge here would really put this thing more in line. ~Izzy @-'---- 19:46, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Though SoR could indeed use a slight recharge nerf, i just want to warn from overnerfing: Nowadays you need a third strong support character to handle 3/5 on collapse-unfriendly maps like Corrupted; if you hit the SoR ele too hard, it will most likely get replaced by a third monk with Storm Djinns. Splitting is effective in the current meta. --Void 23:05, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

But not nerfing it enough would hamper the game. IMO it's just plain wrong that one elite is the only(?) viable option for a flagger. --  (CoRrRan / talk) 23:26, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Many flagger builds have come and go, I think the statement of only viable option is a bit over the top here ;) ~Izzy @-'---- 01:34, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Maybe if you lowered the cost to 10 energy and raised the recharge to say, 12 seconds, it would be better for Monks and worse for Eles, especially runners trying to keep a bunch of NPCs alive. --TimeToGetIntense 01:52, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

The cost really does not matter THAT much. 10e, 15e, 20e? It's still being primarily used on eles who are glyphing it. The real problem is the recharge. I think if you nerf this, you may have to nerf Clumsiness a bit (just because it is so silly now), but the net result will be that it opens up the game more. There are plenty of other elites out there for flaggers. --Black mischief 02:10, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I think the cost matters to Monks because right now you pretty much have to glyph SoR, so you can't cast it very often. If the recharge is nerfed, then the skill can be less limited by energy for those Monks. I guess this applies to 4v4 though, but it would be interesting if people started playing SoR at flagstand imo. --TimeToGetIntense 02:23, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

The only problem with the skill is that it can be maintained on multiple people simultaneously. You can spread Shields around in skirmish, even while maintaining Shield on yourself with overlap. Even a modest bump to recharge would have a huge impact on how the skill is used. With a 7 second recharge, you would leave gaps in your own Shield if you wanted to share it with a teammate - at 8 seconds, the gap becomes a significant liability (barring fast recharges). -Ensign 11:12, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I do agree some with Ensign here a higher recharge would help, one of the problems about assaulting the base when someone has SoR is you cannot change targets or jump on a different NPC or pressure the Ele more, because it's pretty easy to keep SoR up on what ever is under attack a higher recharge would allow you to apply more pressure or switch targets more often. In the end on an Ele's bar SoR is not that expensive, so the energy starts to matter less. ~Izzy @-'---- 18:17, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I'd say 10 recharge is fair on this spell. No one liked it at 15 recharge and the lower cast time is an awesome improvement, but I think it will still see play with 10 recharge without trashing the skill. --Dragonious 04:42, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Damn, time to retire my monk again :P This skill got me into using him again. Oh well, I can still own with a smiter. --Deathwing 04:45, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Pls keep useless comments on these pages to a minimum, as they are cluttered enough already, thx. --66.65.162.219 10:01, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Aegis

I'm gonna pull the passive defense discussion down here a bit. One random through I had was what if Aegis was changed to For X seconds, the next x attacks are blocked 50% of the time, this would mean it doesn't do as much against spikes or directed pressure, but still remains in play. Clearly if you went this rout you have to find the other Aegis like effects and do changes to the, but just wanted to throw that idea out there. ~Izzy @-'---- 23:58, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

That would help a little. I guess it wouldn't be necessary to pack counters for Aegis and might help diversify teams. Depends how many hits you're talking about of course. --TimeToGetIntense 00:30, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I know this isn't the main concern when balancing (and really shouldn't be), but PvE players would likely scream bloody murder at that specific change. Given the higher number of attacking enemies (and the increased attack speed in Hard Mode), an Aegis that blocked X attacks during Y seconds would last in PvE a small fraction of the time it would last in PvP - and currently this skill is one of the main survival tools in the end game PvE areas. If it were possible to nerf this skill in some other way, I would be very thankful. Erasculio 00:44, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, if you're in an aggro-controlled environment, would it not be essentially the same (if not better) to simply use Guardian? (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 00:49, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

The aggro-controlled environment isn't that common - for example, if you have a tank and the enemy has melee characters with a monk in their back line, your own offense is not going to be able to reach said back line without getting at least part of the aggro on it. This doesn't really bother me, though - when you limit the play to "Get tank, Prot/etc tank, send tank, nukers stay back, nukers nuke, repeat" it severely limits play. Currently, with less than perfect aggro control, we get a more dynamic playstyle - one in which Aegis really helps. My concern is mostly for a change that would hurt the skill more in PvE than in PvP. If that's the only option I'm sure players would just adapt, but if there were other options, well, I would probably like them more. Erasculio 01:04, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

(Edit Conflict) I can see warriors 'Building Up' on opponents while also using up the X number of attacks that have 50% to be blocked and then unleashing on a different, now unprotected target. Although i dont think that this would necerserily be a bad thing... i do feel it would push aegis out of the meta considerably, because the more mellee thee opposition have, the less effective it would become as the X attacks would happen faster.......Having said all that i really do feel it needs sorting. I'm fed up with seeing runners cast aegis from their GH and be able to provide effective (passive) defense for themselves, their anti-split team AND their flagstand team. The nature of the skill as well makes it difficult to shut down, because it is generally run on more than one member of the team in order to chain it. This means that a nice diversion wont actually give you 40-50 seconds without it. The other team will just stagger their other casters using it. I'm trying to think of suggestions on this but I just dont know. Maybe giving it a smaller range? Who knows how to fix this!? --ChronicinabilitY 00:53, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Making it earshot range would go a long way towards fixing it. --TimeToGetIntense 01:05, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I wonder - what if this were modified to operate similar to Shield of Absorption - start the block percentage out low, and increase it with each successive hit. Something along the lines of "for X seconds, the next X attacks grant an additional 5% chance to block". (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 01:06, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

How about have it end if you get knocked down? That's not even a factor that PvErs consider. :P --TimeToGetIntense 01:08, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I can see the Earshot working quite well actually. Maybe even making it last longer. I can see how this would be seen as a Buff, but consider it lasting 15 seconds, therefore the chain only taking 2 people to maintain it. This would then make disabling it easier. Although that could of course backfire i'm not sure. I do like the Within Earshot idea. It does seem to make more sense. --ChronicinabilitY 01:15, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I think buffing the duration would backfire. You'd still bring 3 of them because you can. It should end if you get KD'd. That would make it stop a lot of damage but easily bypassed for pressuring or spiking. --TimeToGetIntense 01:32, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeh i thought the fact of still bringing 3 would backfire, but i just wish there was more way to disable it. I dont feel that a knock-down ending it would work as that would certainly not open the meta up any more. There would be more shock axe and Dev hammer warriors than we'd know what to do with =S --ChronicinabilitY 01:36, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

It's already rather easy to bypass: enchant removal. Making it end on KD would pretty much make it useless in any typical PvP game, Irresistible Blow would make it irrelevant. (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 01:38, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Problem is enchantment removal is very limited and Aegis often gets covered or you remove it and then the target gets protted and you don't have anything left to remove that with. If it was removed when you got knocked down, it would still be a good skill because it goes on your whole team and besides Shock, Warriors would have a 50% chance to sucessfully end the Aegis using Bull's Strike or a hammer skill. I guess you could bring Griffon's Sweep or Irresistable Blow, but those aren't very good, I doubt they'd see much play due to such a change. --TimeToGetIntense 01:44, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

(Edit Conflict) The problem is that sure enchant removal works fine, and i assume everyone is thinking of flagstand team where these things are likely to be. However the reason i see for it being so overpowered is the fact that being used in the correct place in certain Guild Hall's it can pretty much affect everyone! (Assuming you're not pushing into their hall...at which point passive defense isnt at the forefront of you're mind). Example... You Send you're warrior and ranger to gank. They have all that is what is needed to gank against almost whatever they come up against...but they never come up against aegis, as its not there its been cast half the map away! If it had to be cast where they were then the ranger would have a fair chance at disabling it. Ok so maybe i'm taking it to the extreme but this does happen! --ChronicinabilitY 01:47, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

No offense, but... "Irresistible Blow not very good"? Are you kidding me? (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 01:47, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I must 'lol' --ChronicinabilitY 02:05, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I-blow sucks. It passes as decent in the meta this second because of all the aegis abuse, but a 5 energy hammer attack that barely adds damage and doesn't even have an activation time? Much better skills all around for warrior bars, unless you were specifically aiming to counter aegis (which is generally stupid for a warrior). -Auron 02:16, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

On the contrary, a skill with a decent amount of +dmg that instead of suffering against block, further punishes it (and Aegis is far from the only source of block in the game), is a fairly powerful skill. (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 02:20, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Mighty Blow is better. Anyway... Aegis anyone? --TimeToGetIntense 02:35, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Except that Mighty Blow does nothing against any form of blocking, hardly limited to Aegis, either - Soldier's Defense, Natural Stride, et cetera, anyone? (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 02:41, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Mighty Blow is better hands down. But back to topic, I like Izzy's idea about aegis expiring after X number of hits; it will still mitigate copious amounts of autoattack damage, but it won't automatically stop adren spikes (which it currently does). -Auron 02:49, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Reset Indent...I think there are 2 sides to this skill that need looking at and both are quite different. 1 is what it does, which there is already a lot of discussion as to how that should change. 2 being who it does it to. Which personally i feel is the more important issue here. Change that and it would force a change in the meta (at least slightly) and mean that only flagstand teams had to worry about it, Making it much more dealable (if thats a word! >.> )--ChronicinabilitY 03:09, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't think this sort of change would matter, for two reasons. First, if you're going to focus fire someone, Aegis is already weak. On any sort of spike the Aegis gets stripped off before anyone shows up by some set of removals. Second, outside of spike situations Aegis is good because it neutralizes target switching and the odd interrupt. If a physical stays on a target for more than a few hits, they're going to get the active prot that forces that physical to switch targets...into Aegis. Basically in order for this to have any meaningful effect x would need to be a really low number like 3, so it'd drop quickly after swapping onto a new target. That'd be a pretty huge change to the skill, but it's how you'd have to go if you wanted to go this route. -Ensign 03:11, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, you could wand it off. --TimeToGetIntense 03:17, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

That's why I suggested the SoA-style route - it makes Aegis less of a "fire and forget" target-switching/interrupt counter, and more of a "pressure easing" spell. Target switching is effective because the block percentage starts out low on the new target, and the initial state doesn't cripple interrupters (though over time it would make their job more difficult, especially if the target they're interrupting is also getting hit). (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 03:31, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Resetting indent because I'm introducing a contrarian view. Please don't nerf Aegis. It's the only skill which allows teams to take a significant number of squishies without having to camp them in wards 24/7. Any weakening of Aegis will shift the currently quite balanced meta to one in which physical pressure is overwhelmingly dominant. As it is, there are several perfectly viable ways to deal with it: MoD, interrupts, spiking through it with Shatter, Expose Defences, Guiding Hands. If your build will be completely shut down by an Aegis chain then I think it's right that you should have to spec against it. Otherwise why not just run 6 warriors and a couple of monks? I think there is a basic misconception that nerfing one defensive skill will lead to a less defensive meta. In my opinion it's more likely that teams will just increase the amount of other defence that they carry. For example, expect to see ward use shoot up. It's even possible that teams would start bringing 3 monks, or perhaps more monk skills on a range of other characters. Wards are an even bigger problem than Aegis imo, because they're unremovable, much harder to interrupt (particularly on 40% FC sets), and they encourage static, boring play. An increase in ward use would also encourage increased AoE use, which is in itself a bad thing for GvG because AoE-heavy teams can afford to play very defensively for 20 minutes knowing they have a huge advantage in VoD. Errr 08:39, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Physical pressure exists because melee has high autoattack DPS, thus people bring lots of counters. This particular counter, however, is too broken; the range is too good, among other things. Allowing a monk to "prot" an overextending war or sin from two aggro bubbles away is ridiculous; reducing it to earshot range would help solve that problem.

Sure, if your build happens to have a dom mes, you can break one target's aegis every 25 seconds with shatter to help with a spike, but single enchant removals in no way counters aegis. And yeah, wards are a pain in the ass to interrupt, but they haven't ever saved a party member from the other side of the map :/ -Auron 12:14, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Exactly agree with Auron on this one. The effect of the spell doesnt seem (too) broken, its just its range is ridicoulous. Within Earshot would solve this, and wouldnt be as restrictive as wards because once they had Aegis on the Sin could then extend as far as he wanted. He just couldnt extend and THEN get protted, which i feel is whats broken with it. --ChronicinabilitY 13:05, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

There are hardly any warriors, sins, or dervs in HA...that alone gives you the idea that *something* is over or under-powered, and it seems to me that that something is Aegis. Its effect means that it is impossible for sin combos without having a way to circumvent it, warriors have a hard time gaining adrenaline to unleash some of their higher damaged skills without a way around block, and dervishs more useful attack skills may fail to hit, wasting a good portion of an already limited energy pool. Aegis has kept mele out of ha for too long, the large party size allows for faster hex removal for skills like exposed defenses. As aegis is usually chained between several monks, the duration that it would lose effect would be quite short if a party brought enchantment removal. the closest solution aside from a nerf is that teams could chain chillblains or something like that.Killer Revan 16:53, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

IWAY stands in harsh contrast to that statement.-- (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 16:58, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

I thought IWAY was long gone...is it back now...i do PvE a lot more than PvP(Not all all that close to r2 hero)?Killer Revan 00:58, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

IWAY isn't very popular anymore, but Aegis was just as prevalent then as it was now, and still wasn't a problem. (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 04:49, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Have you done any HA in the past 2-3 months? Very few teams Don't have Rangers (Thumpers or R-spike, i've seen a trapper or two) Warriors (hammer generally is what i've seen..this is the most rare though), Dervishs (several different builds), or paragons (pressure/spike) Sword.wind. 17:20, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

However little ive been there...there appears to be very few groups that are not ritspike, sf, sh, monk...seems that casters are just overpowering mele somehow...imo...if assassins, dervishes, and warriors are getting into groups now, then i dont really have a problem with this skill...anyway...ive been there somewhat recently...but not incredibly recently.Killer Revan 21:13, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

HA is an awful place with poor balance. GvG is what you should judge the balance of the game on. HA doesn't even punish you for losing. The best way to earn fame is to play builds that win fast or lose fast. --TimeToGetIntense 21:45, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Why would you want to make any changes to Aegis? It allows a runner to support his team while running flags, using it at the stand is quite risky. For spikes you can shatter it, for pressure play you have MoD. Aegis is strong, but not overpowered (and this comes from an experienced melee player). -Void 11:15, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

"It allows a runner to support his team while running flags, using it at the stand is quite risky. Allowing the runner to support flagstand team back there IS what makes it overpowered! it SHOULD be risky using this! therefore allowing it to be interrupted etc. You're still looking the wrong way round, sure u can deal with it at falgstand, but on a split where u dont have much if any enchant removal its just totally overpowered. Dont make it do less at flagstand, but change its stupidly overpowered range! --ChronicinabilitY 13:36, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Runners have always supported their teams, whether it's through HP or Extinguish or LoD or Orders(!) or Aegis, and I honestly don't know why that's suddenly perceived to be a bad thing. I think that if Aegis is nerfed so that the flagger can't use it, the main effect will be to weaken (possibly fatally) the current balanced build archetype and promote para-heavy physical pressure in its place. Is that really what you want? Errr 20:55, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

I think the better question is should a runner even be able to support his team from 2 radars away? --Pork soldier 12:39, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

2 radars? Please, if you're going to argue then at least have some basic knowledge of how the skill works. Otherwise it's just trolling. Errr 13:12, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok so he got the distance totally wrong, But his point is not wrong....Should a runner be able to support Half the map? (And on certain guild halls i know its not near to half the map but on others it is!) When the runner can stand half way between flagstand and base and cast aegis with nobody around so no risk of interruption, and it benifit the flagstand team AND the Split team defending in his base, there is something surely wrong! It's passive defense at its worst, and until it's fixed, so called 'overpowered' skills like expose defences NEED to be that powerfull just to deal with it in all areas, especially on the split! --ChronicinabilitY 13:18, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm just asking people to consider the probably effects of an Aegis nerf on the meta-game, because they will be large. People aren't going to run less defence because Aegis is nerfed, they're going to switch to other kinds of defence such as using more high armor characters instead of casters - and armor-based defence is a hell of a lot more passive than Aegis.

And the example people keep quoting of the runner being able to cover both a split team in the base and the rest of the team at the flagstand is very weak. On many maps its impossible, and on most maps there is at best a very small area in which you can do that. And it's not like anyone ever stands in the middle of nowhere just spamming Aegis, because that would be stupid - if they're not running the flag they'd be 8374529803745x more effective in base or at the stand. Even if they do get one cast off as they run through the zone, you have maybe one Aegis on the split every minute or so, which is not a big deal because the attacking split can do something crazy like um attack NPCs for the 10 secs that it's up. And the whole situation almost never happens anyway, because 95% of the time the flagger is one of the guys defending the base. Errr 13:56, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Aegis I feel is definitely NOT overpowered. If you have a problem with its range, LoD and Heal party also have such range so you'd have to nerf them all. The energy cost is no joke to begin with, and the fact remains it lasts 10 seconds with 30 recharge so it takes MULTIPLE copies and slots to run. Still it is not too much of a hassle to bring something to strip enchantments, or mirror of disenchantment to strip them ALL imo. It's like flipping a coin basically and you DO have a chance at getting most hits in, or tails a lot more than half the time. Simply put from the looks of it anything that does anything about peoples attacks getting through seems to be under attack. This is not that powerful, it's useless against spell pressure too. This game has obstacles you must overcome thats part of the strategy stop trying to nerf everything you don't like and get use to it and find a way around it. Might as well make all conditions degen 2 each and hexes expire after 5 seconds now if your going to continue to make everything that becomes a problem easier. Or let's put it this way. Kill aegis, and blinding/blurred vision will avenge it. Which would you rather be up against? Unforgivablesin 22:44, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Truthfully? I would rather be against blind then aegis. Its much easier to remove. You do make one good point though: to nerf aegis we need to nerf at least heal party, if not both that and LoD (LoD could stay though due to elite status). Aegis definitely needs a nerf though, as its range is too long.--John deathblade 04:00, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

The difference between Aegis and Heal Part and LoD, or any of the others, is the fact that the others are active, they need to be use at the right times. Hitting LoD when everyone is at 95% health isnt going to help anyone. Whereas Aegis is being used on recharge by runners and such who are going to use it whether their team is all at 100% health or with a dead monk and everyone at about 50% health! It's passive defense at it's worst and its not good for the meta. --ChronicinabilitY 04:06, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Trying to claim there's significant skill involved in LoD is a bit of a stretch imo. Errr 11:04, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Significant skill, probably not, but it is at least active and requires ar least a tiny bit of thought. Aegis could be run by a Bot the way it is now! --ChronicinabilitY 13:20, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Made a speech and it didn't post so let's try this again. If the bot factor is a problem they'd nerf the 55's entire bar but that obviously is not it. Let me put this short and sweet this time. From the looks of it annoyed melee have put a lot of prot skills under attack that impair their pressure the least bit. This game has obstacles true but also way's to overcome them. Hexes to prevent blocking, attacks that can't be blocked, spells to remove enchantments so why not bring some like a lot of people already do! Now lets see why this shouldn't be nerfed. Energy cost is definitely not cheap, the range is the same as heal party, guardian can get up to 52% and be kept up forever with just ONE copy and none of this huge recharge. Making it an aoe would either make runners wait til they are near their party to shout it, or would make wards replace it. Then you won't be able to strip it, will you be happy then? From watching recent gvgs blurred vision blind duos have already replaced this in teams so go ask your monk would they rather remove blind and hexes for you to damage or would they rather you just bring one skill to deal with it so they can actually heal you. Mirror of disenchantment was made for things like this. This spell does nothing others don't, just combines them in different ways. I use this in pve, not pvp, that being the cast this has helped a lot and I don't feel it is worth nerfing over those unprepared in pvp just to make pve harder when the skill truly is fine, if it was a problem we would of realized by now since it has been there for ages. Unforgivablesin 20:01, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Resetting indent. And I also want to echo sentiments that, if aegis is nerfed, the meta will shift heavily to paragon-based midlines. I'm seeing enough paragons as it is. Pluto 22:38, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

My big beef here is that, people are getting too caught up in whether its "overpowered" or "underpowered". When really: Right now, aegis is a bad GAME MECHANIC. Lets pretend I made a skill called... Oni Firestarter's rage. And it instajibbbed everything on radar if I was under an enchantment, hex and condition and stance. 10 second cast, 20 minute recharge, easily interupted, 30 energy. Is it overpowered? underpowered? Does it matter? Its a BAD MECHANIC, it will make games worse just by existing, entire games will revolve around brining this skill and countering/protecting it, above all else. Right now, aegis chains are a BAD mechanic. MoD exists. So how can you balance aegis? Against dual para's with MoD, aegis will be down almost all the time. Against a team w/o it, aegis will be up alot. MoD is a hard counter for Aegis and Taint. So basically you create this rock paper scissors scenario. Nobody is saying that Aegis cant be countered. It can easily. MoR MoD. MoR Shatter Drain + Spike. Dual Paras with MoD. NR/Tranq. The point is that the way it is now, Aegis gets around soft counters, and demands harder counters. So first thing first, MoD is bad. Anytime a skill like MoD exists, its pretty hard to "balance" Aegis, because its such an obscene counter for it. its even worse for taint. How can you balance taint with MoD in play? (but thats for a different thread). Heal Party and LoD are different from Aegis IMO. Heal Party + LoD give marginal heals and prevent a team from pressuring someone out (and it doesn't even do that too well). Aegis effectively stops both pressure and spike. Letting that be applied from range, is pretty lame imo. Heal party is also a spammed skill, one that does little work while you run. Aegis works for 10 seconds. Again, not a fair comparison, the drawback to spamming HP from range was that the other runner picked up tons of ground on you.So first off: Reduce aegis to earshot. Force the other team to negate soft counters, its not enough to just run out of mes range, if you really want that aegis to go up, you should ahve to SHUT DOWN their mes, instead of abuse aegis range. And I think that GW is moving toward caps on alot of different stacking effects. It was done for armor, I think it should be done for block as well (and misses and so on, but a different thread). With some 1200 skills, balancing ALL their relationships just isn't going to happen. This wouldn't impact the need to remove aegis for spikes etc, but at least allow physicals to charge adren at a somewhat reasonable rate etc. Oni Firestarter 23:33, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

What about "For X seconds, all party members have a 50% chance to block attacks, Aegis ends after it has blocked Y attacks."? -- Gordon Ecker 23:46, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Right so in places like Urgoz where your being mobbed at you only block the first few X attacks before your slaughtered. Unforgivablesin 01:14, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Just block attack skills :P Anti Oath 01:55, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it needs a nerf, but if it does get nerfed, I'd prefer a fixed number of blocks per ally over a fixed number of block attempts per ally. -- Gordon Ecker 03:05, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

uhhh how able this its a 2 sec cast interruptible, mirror of disenchantment has already gotten a buff to help stop aegis chains, and it helps people smart enough to run a shatter enchantment in there build. Just learn to run minor interrupts and you wont lose to aegis? Don't blame the skills for failing.

Seriously I think if they were to nerf this it should be to your aggro circle, if nerfed at all. Anything with the smallest preparation will have no problem with this. Once again if you look people just don't want to bother with anything that blocks too many of their attacks or lowers how much they hit for, so pretty much they want death to prot monks. Get good and kill them yourself not through nerfs I say. Unforgivablesin 01:37, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Exactly the opposite is what we (well myself at least) wants! I want prot monks! (or balanced monks with prot) so they actually have to Prot someone. So there is a difference between a good monk who can see the battlefield and pre-prot, and a bad one who can't. So that the monk is actually doing what he has to do ACTIVELY. which is why i feel this skill needs a nerf, it's not active in anyway at all, it's simply cast on recharge. and it's not just run on monks (if at all) Runner's and Midliners usually have it on their bar. These layers of passive defense are hurting the game IMO. it means that really good nice skills that actually reflect a players skill (Shield of Deflection) are getting nerfed because there is so much passive defense that when combined with a good prot monk it is just too much protection. My view is to nerf the passive and encourage the active defense. At the moment the active is going to have to take a nerf, simply because of all the passive defense in the meta. --ChronicinabilitY 02:59, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Meh, I've always liked Aegis the way it is. I don't even run it in my teams because too many people bring mirror (or other enchant removal). I have a bigger problem with DA, as it's the same thing as aegis, but unremovable. Shard 04:36, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Aegis has been perfectly reasonable ever since Mirror of Disenchantment has been in the meta. Monk Aegises have always been really risky, and become even more risky against teams who know to hunt for them. It's a huge investment for a Monk to make and it being interrupted can be crushing. The most value of Aegis comes from the off-Monk Aegis, from the ability of that character to put up Aegis and stabilize a team for a few seconds when taking heavy fire. However those Aegises are readily dealt with by Mirror of Disenchantment, so they aren't really a problem. Of all the big defensive tools in the current meta Aegis is the most readily dealt with. Ask the good Warriors what causes the biggest problems and what prevents things from dying. They'll tell you that Ward is a problem and Shield of Deflection wrecks them. Aegis doesn't make the list. -Ensign 08:53, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Protective Bond

With the ability to mass enchant now, Prot Bond again proves to be a be a useful skill. It can be buried under numerous energy given enchantments, and supplemented by Paragon shouts or Necro energy gain skills to the point where the monk using it, can have it up indefinitely. I suggest increasing the energy loss to prevent this from being abused more in the near future. 16:28, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

"Prot Bond again proves to be a be a useful skill." Oh the skill has become usefull what are we doing allowing skills to become usefull! Of course it needs a nerf if it's actually usefull! L O L ! I really dont know what to say i can't stop laughing at the suggestion of nerfing this! --ChronicinabilitY 00:31, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Aww! you beat me to the lol. Done25 00:33, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Protective Bond was nerfed into oblivion in the past

I lol'd Pluto 22:50, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Lolzor68.226.80.7 23:16, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

O_O When did this become overpowered???--Shadetz X 09:01, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

What does this skill do again? I've not seen it in a year and a half.--72.211.155.160 19:12, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

I think this is far from overpowered, when it starts getting used somewhere I'll be more worried about it, I'm gonna move this to the archive. ~Izzy @-'---- 23:41, 20 August 2007 (UTC)