Golden Dragonfly (This needs to be Single Target Damage)

[Solarverse]

How often do you really hit more than one enemy with this ability? I honestly can't remember too many times where I have actually hit more than one NPC since the OG Devs changed how NPCs stack. Yet, this power, which is our hardest hitting power, has a -chance to critt vs other Ninja Blade abilities and it takes a bit of a -Damage hit because it is considered a narrow cone.

This ability needs to be Single Target only, it's damage adjusted to match a T9 Single Target Damage table and have a 100% to critt from hide with a normal chance to critt outside of hide.

 

Discuss.

[arcane]

I like being able to slot Armageddon and Fury of the Gladiator procs in my single target chain, so your suggestion would have a negative impact on the set for me. Respectfully no thank you.

[Solarverse]

10 minutes ago, arcane said:

I like being able to slot Armageddon and Fury of the Gladiator procs in my single target chain, so your suggestion would have a negative impact on the set for me. Respectfully no thank you.

 

Yeah, I guess that probably would break a few builds. I seem to recall a bit o an outcry when this was done to Claws as well. My main gripe is that the Cone is so weak, I don't see it justifying the -critt chance and -damage. If that was changed, I wouldn't care, don't think anybody uses it like a cone anyway since it is so unreliable.

Edited September 10, 2023 by Solarverse

[FupDup]

We could alternatively go in the other direction and let the cone extend a bit further and/or make it a little bit wider so it can hit multiple targets more consistently. This would unfortunately result in lower procs rates so the ST damage would suffer a little if you proc'd out the power. 

[Solarverse]

3 hours ago, FupDup said:

We could alternatively go in the other direction and let the cone extend a bit further and/or make it a little bit wider so it can hit multiple targets more consistently. This would unfortunately result in lower procs rates so the ST damage would suffer a little if you proc'd out the power. 

 

I mean, yeah, if they widened the cone even slightly, and extended the range slightly, that would make all the difference in the world.

[Yomo Kimyata]

4 hours ago, Solarverse said:

 

Yeah, I guess that probably would break a few builds. I seem to recall a bit o an outcry when this was done to Claws as well. My main gripe is that the Cone is so weak, I don't see it justifying the -critt chance and -damage. If that was changed, I wouldn't care, don't think anybody uses it like a cone anyway since it is so unreliable.

 

My purpose is not to be pedantic, but it is not "unreliable".  It works as described, 20 degree cone with 10 foot length.

 

If I am playing a katana/ninja blade or broadsword, and I am fighting more than one opponent in melee range, I generally will take that fraction of a second to move slightly and get two or three opponents in the cone.  

 

I would hate, HATE to see golden butterfly/headsplitter get the Shadow Maul treatment, where the cone is widened and the damage is reduced.  If you choose not to get your opponents in the cone, that's up to you, but I really hope they do not change the power.

[Frozen Burn]

I quite often get 2-3 foes in one hit.  I love it!  It takes practice to line them up in the narrow cone, but when you get your rhythm, it's great!  I think the power is fine the way it is and should definitely not be changed.  

[Spaghetti Betty]

I like the existence of "cleave"-style attacks! They reward positioning greatly. Whatever unfortunate soul happens to be close enough receives the full brunt of a powerhouse ST attack. It adds identity to the set.

 

46 minutes ago, Solarverse said:

I mean, yeah, if they widened the cone even slightly, and extended the range slightly, that would make all the difference in the world.

 

You could always try it on a Tanker!

[Solarverse]

1 hour ago, Yomo Kimyata said:

 

My purpose is not to be pedantic, but it is not "unreliable".  It works as described, 20 degree cone with 10 foot length.

 

If I am playing a katana/ninja blade or broadsword, and I am fighting more than one opponent in melee range, I generally will take that fraction of a second to move slightly and get two or three opponents in the cone.  

 

I would hate, HATE to see golden butterfly/headsplitter get the Shadow Maul treatment, where the cone is widened and the damage is reduced.  If you choose not to get your opponents in the cone, that's up to you, but I really hope they do not change the power.

 

You solo a lot?

[Yomo Kimyata]

58 minutes ago, Solarverse said:

 

You solo a lot?

 

I do solo a lot.  On the one hand, when you are solo you won't bump into other players as you spend a half second lining up your shot.  On the flip side, if you are on a team, then it doesn't really matter how many enemies you get in your cone, since whoever you don't hit will be taken down in short order by someone else on your team.

 

[Solarverse]

44 minutes ago, Yomo Kimyata said:

 

I do solo a lot.  On the one hand, when you are solo you won't bump into other players as you spend a half second lining up your shot.  On the flip side, if you are on a team, then it doesn't really matter how many enemies you get in your cone, since whoever you don't hit will be taken down in short order by someone else on your team.

 

 

I think this may be why I don't find the cone as useful as you do, I don't do much soloing. Mobs get knocked, pushed, teleported, pulled by singularity, repelled by...well, a lot; and then there is the speed in which blasters kill mobs, or another player causing collision involuntary movements....there are so many things that can and do happen to screw up lining mobs up for that fraction of a cone.

 

So having learned this, I can see why it is far more useful to you and rather a hindrance to me. But this is a situation where it can't be changed to help some because it would hurt others. Same reason most changes in games don't sit well with people, heh. And trust me, I know how that feels, been on the receiving end of that for about 75% of the changes made in this game, all the way from sounds, to graphics, to mechanics to outright power changes. So I can sympathize.

 

 

Edited September 10, 2023 by Solarverse
grammar

[biostem]

The devs seem to use narrow cones to represent an attack's ability to "pierce" enemies standing right behind others, (see Piercing Rounds from Dual Pistols).  This may be another similar case...

[Solarverse]

20 minutes ago, biostem said:

The devs seem to use narrow cones to represent an attack's ability to "pierce" enemies standing right behind others, (see Piercing Rounds from Dual Pistols).  This may be another similar case...

 

You know, back in the day, that thin cone worked a lot better. I seem to recall Golden Dragonfly having a much further reach...dare I say double what it is now. In those days, I didn't mind, actually kind of liked it, but now...not so much. Was it actually changed, or has powercreep and the popularity of knock back cover up my illusion? I used to be able to target the NPC in the back of a mob, and hit three, maybe even four of them in a single hit...loved it. Now, if I target the NPC in the back of the mob, he's out of range.

[honoroit]

dunno about the super thin cones, but battle axe vs everything else is like night and day quality of life like...

 

battle axe became small aoe spheres instead of cones, and you hit 4 or 5 clumped typically and dont have to target one behind another clumsily (see pendulum)

 

itd be nice if other sets got that treatment.

Edited September 10, 2023 by honoroit

[Kaika]

12 hours ago, Solarverse said:

 

You know, back in the day, that thin cone worked a lot better. I seem to recall Golden Dragonfly having a much further reach...dare I say double what it is now. In those days, I didn't mind, actually kind of liked it, but now...not so much. Was it actually changed, or has powercreep and the popularity of knock back cover up my illusion? I used to be able to target the NPC in the back of a mob, and hit three, maybe even four of them in a single hit...loved it. Now, if I target the NPC in the back of the mob, he's out of range.

As someone who's first 50 was a Katana scrapper back in like Issue 2 or something, I can confirm that, no, it did not, it's always had a absolutely tiny cone and range. As other have pointed out it is really nice as a way to proc -res from Gladiators Fury, and can fairly consistently land on 2 targets solo. I don't think the power itself needs a buff as its a VERY good power, I feel the issue comes more from Ninja blades lack of Lotus Drops, making its only AoE a admittedly nice cone, that's very held back by its target cap. Like alot of the early stalker sets, it drops a AoE, which really holds it back in today CoH. Considering how long this set has been in the game, I don't think bring Lotus drops back is a viable option though. Honestly I think a better way to go about this would be to give Flashing steal the Power Crash treatment that EM stalkers get, increasing its target cap, and maybe range slightly, to give the set a bit better AoE presence. No need to mess with Golden Dragonfly

[Solarverse]

47 minutes ago, Riot Siren said:

As someone who's first 50 was a Katana scrapper back in like Issue 2 or something, I can confirm that, no, it did not, it's always had a absolutely tiny cone and range. As other have pointed out it is really nice as a way to proc -res from Gladiators Fury, and can fairly consistently land on 2 targets solo. I don't think the power itself needs a buff as its a VERY good power, I feel the issue comes more from Ninja blades lack of Lotus Drops, making its only AoE a admittedly nice cone, that's very held back by its target cap. Like alot of the early stalker sets, it drops a AoE, which really holds it back in today CoH. Considering how long this set has been in the game, I don't think bring Lotus drops back is a viable option though. Honestly I think a better way to go about this would be to give Flashing steal the Power Crash treatment that EM stalkers get, increasing its target cap, and maybe range slightly, to give the set a bit better AoE presence. No need to mess with Golden Dragonfly

 

I guess my memory is just old as dirt then, lol. Honestly, I have never understood Stalkers getting AoE Damage, they were supposed to be King of Single Target, not AoE. I have been against Stalkers having AoE since day one and believe AoE goes completely against the concept of Stalkers. But, you know, man, that is just my opinion, lol. But as strong as you all are about not changing Golden Dragonfly, I was just as strong about Stalkers not having AoE. I didn't get my way. Like I said, about 75% of changes in this game negatively impacted me. That's why I am not trying to push this issue much on you folks, because I know exactly how that feels when some jackass complains away something you love. Really pisses me off, so I try and not do that to others.

[Solarverse]

54 minutes ago, Riot Siren said:

As someone who's first 50 was a Katana scrapper back in like Issue 2 or something, I can confirm that, no, it did not, it's always had a absolutely tiny cone and range.

 

Just realized why I thought it used to work much better. Like yuo, I have been playing this game since its first week of release (my computer sucked and wouldn't run it, so had to buy a new one to play the game) and why I thought it worked better, is because NPC's used to pack much more tightly than they do now. Collision mechanics and all.

[Kaika]

2 minutes ago, Solarverse said:

 

I guess my memory is just old as dirt then, lol. Honestly, I have never understood Stalkers getting AoE Damage, they were supposed to be King of Single Target, not AoE. I have been against Stalkers having AoE since day one and believe AoE goes completely against the concept of Stalkers. But, you know, man, that is just my opinion, lol. But as strong as you all are about not changing Golden Dragonfly, I was just as strong about Stalkers not having AoE. I didn't get my way. Like I said, about 75% of changes in this game negatively impacted me. That's why I am not trying to push this issue much on you folks, because I know exactly how that feels when some jackass complains away something you love. Really pisses me off, so I try and not do that to others.

If stalkers didn't have AoE they would be by far the worst AT in the game... and they kinda were back in the day. Even back before IO's and incarnates stalkers just kinda didn't realistically work on most larger teams. There is a reason this AT used to be the least played non EAT in the game. Scrappers, blaster, Corrs and even brutes can dish out some serious single target damage, even enough to keep fairly close with stalker in this day and age, and back then scrappers were flat out better. While Having a AT that only really deals in single target sounds great on paper, it does not really work in a game where there is about 16 enemies in most groups, without adding a EB or a AV to most spawns, and even then you would need to nerf the single target of every other AT to give them real value.

[Kaika]

2 minutes ago, Solarverse said:

 

Just realized why I thought it used to work much better. Like yuo, I have been playing this game since its first week of release (my computer sucked and wouldn't run it, so had to buy a new one to play the game) and why I thought it worked better, is because NPC's used to pack much more tightly than they do now. Collision mechanics and all.

Yeah that was likely the case, back in the "Pack everyone in the dumpster and burn" days of CoH

[Solarverse]

32 minutes ago, Riot Siren said:

If stalkers didn't have AoE they would be by far the worst AT in the game... and they kinda were back in the day. Even back before IO's and incarnates stalkers just kinda didn't realistically work on most larger teams. There is a reason this AT used to be the least played non EAT in the game. Scrappers, blaster, Corrs and even brutes can dish out some serious single target damage, even enough to keep fairly close with stalker in this day and age, and back then scrappers were flat out better. While Having a AT that only really deals in single target sounds great on paper, it does not really work in a game where there is about 16 enemies in most groups, without adding a EB or a AV to most spawns, and even then you would need to nerf the single target of every other AT to give them real value.

 

I disagree. It was the way people played them, not because of any other reasons, IMO. I even made videos showing what Stalkers could do if they stopped doing dumb ass things like hit and run, or running ahead of Brutes and thinking they could Tank damage, or pulling aggro and running. I was playing Stalkers in those days just the same way I play them now. I stay single target focused on all but Elec (for obvious reasons) and I rip high priority targets to shreds. But, everyone was trying to play Stalkers like they were one trick ponies and that was never my style...those players in those days gave Stalkers a bad name, and because of what has been done with Stalkers, giving them all of this AoE, sadly Scrappers are taking the back seat to them IMO. These days trying to do AoE seems redundant when you have blasters that pretty much one shot everything they look at except the priority larger targets. Difference in game style I suppose, but I will say I regularly am commented on my playstyle (tooting my own horn I guess, but comments given to Stalkers has always been rare, so I take mine with pride) most especially when facing off against target similar to Paragon Protectors, Malta and anything that pops a T9 or uses phase shift.  😉  To each their own, sadly, to each my own was trampled upon, heh.

[Kaika]

16 minutes ago, Solarverse said:

 

I disagree. It was the way people played them, not because of any other reasons, IMO. I even made videos showing what Stalkers could do if they stopped doing dumb ass things like hit and run, or running ahead of Brutes and thinking they could Tank damage, or pulling aggro and running. I was playing Stalkers in those days just the same way I play them now. I stay single target focused on all but Elec (for obvious reasons) and I rip high priority targets to shreds. But, everyone was trying to play Stalkers like they were one trick ponies and that was never my style...those players in those days gave Stalkers a bad name, and because of what has been done with Stalkers, giving them all of this AoE, sadly Scrappers are taking the back seat to them IMO. These days trying to do AoE seems redundant when you have blasters that pretty much one shot everything they look at except the priority larger targets. Difference in game style I suppose, but I will say I regularly am commented on my playstyle (tooting my own horn I guess, but comments given to Stalkers has always been rare, so I take mine with pride) most especially when facing off against target similar to Paragon Protectors, Malta and anything that pops a T9 or uses phase shift.  😉  To each their own, sadly, to each my own was trampled upon, heh.

Not sure what you're getting at here as wanting stalkers to focus solely on single target damage literally makes them a one trick pony. Sure deleting a high prio boss is nice, but this is something scrapper and blaster could already do almost as well and even better on more maneuverable targets or super beefy ones, all while being able to do much MUCH more. I played stalker back in those days, I never focused on hit and run, and never had any issue with survivability, for sure I agree with you that most people played it rather poorly, and honestly most still do. No matter what I did back then I found them much less effective then a scrapper, for sure stalkers single target burst was higher, but scrapper could deal as much, if not more over longer periods of time, control aggro, and deal solid AoE. I find it odd, how you're OK with Ele having AoE, but not the more modern sets for some reason, not sure why that's a exception for you. I'm not sure why you're opposed to the AT having more AoE when the example you are giving of a class good in AoE, also Excels rather well in single target damage, especially in burst even.

Edited September 11, 2023 by Riot Siren

[honoroit]

you see stalkers in groups, particularly, dashing frantically to mobs to get a hit in, on trash anyway. whether theyre doing vastly more than a blaster on AVs? maybe?

 

aside from the aoe focused sets, like spines or ele, theyre very limited (when compared to decimation blasters bring), and even on those need to work much harder to feel as if theyre actually playing.

 

i dont know if thats something that can be fixed, as thered be riots if blaster damage came down.

[Without_Pause]

1 hour ago, Solarverse said:

 

I disagree. It was the way people played them, not because of any other reasons, IMO. I even made videos showing what Stalkers could do if they stopped doing dumb ass things like hit and run, or running ahead of Brutes and thinking they could Tank damage, or pulling aggro and running. I was playing Stalkers in those days just the same way I play them now. I stay single target focused on all but Elec (for obvious reasons) and I rip high priority targets to shreds. But, everyone was trying to play Stalkers like they were one trick ponies and that was never my style...those players in those days gave Stalkers a bad name, and because of what has been done with Stalkers, giving them all of this AoE, sadly Scrappers are taking the back seat to them IMO. These days trying to do AoE seems redundant when you have blasters that pretty much one shot everything they look at except the priority larger targets. Difference in game style I suppose, but I will say I regularly am commented on my playstyle (tooting my own horn I guess, but comments given to Stalkers has always been rare, so I take mine with pride) most especially when facing off against target similar to Paragon Protectors, Malta and anything that pops a T9 or uses phase shift.  😉  To each their own, sadly, to each my own was trampled upon, heh.

So Stalkers should only function the way that you want to play them. Got it. I'm on the flip side. Removing the AoE in various sets limits the amount of Stalkers I would want to play. There's zero reason for MA to have literally no AoE. No one needs a whole melee set of ST attacks when in reality an end game build needs like 3-4 of them. You sure as hell don't need 6.

[Solarverse]

1 hour ago, Riot Siren said:

Not sure what you're getting at here as wanting stalkers to focus solely on single target damage literally makes them a one trick pony. Sure deleting a high prio boss is nice, but this is something scrapper and blaster could already do almost as well and even better on more maneuverable targets or super beefy ones, all while being able to do much MUCH more. I played stalker back in those days, I never focused on hit and run, and never had any issue with survivability, for sure I agree with you that most people played it rather poorly, and honestly most still do. No matter what I did back then I found them much less effective then a scrapper, for sure stalkers single target burst was higher, but scrapper could deal as much, if not more over longer periods of time, control aggro, and deal solid AoE. I find it odd, how you're OK with Ele having AoE, but not the more modern sets for some reason, not sure why that's a exception for you. I'm not sure why you're opposed to the AT having more AoE when the example you are giving of a class good in AoE, also Excels rather well in single target damage, especially in burst even.

 

You say this, yet Ninja Blade is still one of the most popular Stalkers, and that is very ST focused. That Cone is a bit of a laugh, so I won't even comment much more on that one. In the end, I still say Stalker should have remained ST focused, it just needed to be better. Instead of making it better like the class was supposed to be, they instead added in AoE, which in my opinion was just a huge mistake. Had they done with the class what it was designed to do, I don't think we would be having this discussion. But, you know, Devs do what Devs do and us players have to make sense of it all. We just have our different ways of looking at things, only difference is my way of looking at it is in the way the class was supposed to function by design, not what they have turned it in to. It needed help, they gave it the wrong kind of help. Now the class is beyond putting it right, so we are stuck with it as is.

[Solarverse]

1 hour ago, honoroit said:

you see stalkers in groups, particularly, dashing frantically to mobs to get a hit in, on trash anyway. whether theyre doing vastly more than a blaster on AVs? maybe?

 

aside from the aoe focused sets, like spines or ele, theyre very limited (when compared to decimation blasters bring), and even on those need to work much harder to feel as if theyre actually playing.

 

i dont know if thats something that can be fixed, as thered be riots if blaster damage came down.

 

That boils back to al the damn knock back this game has now. This has always been an issue with all melee AT's, not just strictly a Stalker issue. Tanks, Brutes, Scrappers and Stalkers all share that same problem. However, the Knock Back crowd won that war, so now we have to deal with it. However, no matter which melee AT I play, I already know that chasing my target or mobs is always going to be a problem. That is why they gave us Fold Space, the problem with that is though, not everyone wants to take Teleport as their travel power to get it on every single melee character they have, so that power in of itself becomes redundant. I don't see any of that changing though, but point being, that is not a Stalker problem, that is a melee class problem.