See, I don't think the actual problems here are really being addressed. We have a lot of cool flashy ideas for monks but no substance. Monk's have new stances, new moves, new ratios, and new algorithms but the the same old shitty lack of definition and role in group/raids.
Ok, so their crappy dps has gone from borderline undesirable (borderline because they still had use as a puller and in rare instances a tank in a pinch for a few seconds) to better dps... sort of.
Monks beat rogues for DPS from the front? You mean where a rogue gets it's bread and butter totally nerfed? Yeah!! Woot go Monks!! You are better than a class whose dps was severely nerfed by attacking from the front. Don't forget rangers, whose DPS comes from their bow. We beat them now too when they melee from the front.
There is either a total lack of communication here, through misinterpretation or sorcery, or we are being trolled by the Admin.
No monk is asking for the ability to go toe to toe as the MT for a boss from 100% to 0%, at best they were asking for the ability to hold its adds off of weaker dps and at worst they were asking for the ability to hold that boss mob for the last 5% after the tank eats it from a bad RNG.
No monk asked to tie or do better dps than a rogue/ranger but those classes have clearly defined roles where they shine.
A ranger's only draw back is that they use arrows. They are a class that is almost entirely defined by 1 item, they can tank well in a pinch (they have a lot of spells that generate great aggro too) and their melee dps is actually pretty good considering. Why is it that 2 classes, who both get dual wield and triple attack at the same ratio have so wildly different DPS while meleeing?
Monks spend 1 to 65 having dual wield advance faster than any other class (15 points above the lvl*5+5), they get double attack first (tied with warriors) and they get a triple attack once they get it. They get every weapon skill first but are the shittiest melee dps? Doesn't it seem logical given the information that a monk should tie a ranger in melee and they should both fall under a rogue but when that ranger pulls out that bow she shows up the monk's DPS? Lets not even get into the fact that depending on the size of the mob and the hit box it has that a ranger could theoretically tank with their bow (storm giants come to mind...)
If a rogue is 1400 dps optimal conditions and a ranger is 1200 (about average of what ive seen from T13 bow parses) and about 1000 melee, a monk should easily be 900 if not 1000 given optimum conditions. Monks aren't there and it doesn't seem like the intention is ever to get them there so when people want something more to actually add value to their class it shouldn't be taken as "Arghh, you monks want to be the best tanks, dps and healers!" Monks just want to have a reason to exist.
That whole, well shaman only hit 700 dps is total bull shit... Yeah, SHAMAN CAN HIT 700 DPS a priest class whom have amazing buffs, good single target heals AND barely fall short of monk DPS while not being subject to the AoEs and other incidental damage from being in melee. Nothing wrong with that picture...
If monks want to aux they are going to have to give something up... What more can you take from them? Aux =/= tanking. What seems like a smarter move at this point is to lower all boss damage by 10-15% and get rid of Auxing. A monk helping his raid by Auxing takes almost a 50% loss in DPS to provide a small bonus to the tank's mitigation, providing a negligible savings to healer mana and making it so the shaman can focus on out DPSing the monk. That is pretty much how I see every raid happening now. Not to mention, the monk isn't eating a percentage of the damage he is Auxing, he is just flat dropping the numbers and putting himself in the position to be riposte. He isn't actually tanking and he is probably doing more to hurt the group by taking the occasional riposte than helping.
Boss hits for 2500, 10% from monk aux makes that 2250 and 2200ac for the tank means that anywhere from 55%(?) to 100% of the remaining damage is mitigated. Lets call it the low end. 55% of 2500 is 1125, 55% of 2250 is 1013 (rounded up). So the monk is knocking off ~112 damage a hit and most mobs quad or more so if all the rounds hit the tank lets call it ~500 less damage a round from the monk assuming the worst RNG round for the tank possible. The monk on the other hand isn't going to have that lovely plate mitigation and one riposte just created anywhere from 2 to 5 times the healing value they are supposed to be mitigating. Even if you made it so if the monk was not #1 or even #2 on the aggro list they took no damage from ripostes, losing 300DPS will slow down a raid far more than the making your healer's mana stretch for 10 or more heals between the 3 to 5 of them.
As I see it, monks are hardly more than a glorified puller at this point which puts them in an even worse situation as new content is developed because the staff think that is a dumb mechanic and have actively tried to do away with it. The only reason to have one in your raid now is because its jail-able to have a pocket one out of raid to pull and to replace that spot with a better DPS which is apparently everyone but druids and beastlords.
There is never a question of doubling up on hot DPS, a Wizard is rarely going to try to get in a pug and hear "nah, we already got a wizard". Once you have one monk though, pretty much hurting the raid to take another...
