proliferation wish list (Stalker: can we have ss)

I would love to have a super strength /ninjistu build anyone know the pro's and cons of why stalker shouldn't have ss as a primary power, if we could have super strength as power. what way could the DEV's tweak it so it doesn't seem to overpowering for a stalker to have. I seen many ninja movies, novels, manga, comics, and anime where a ninja had superhuman strength and I was wondering would it every happen here I just wondering how could this be incorporated without having it seem to overpowered.

I can't see SS ever being OP on a stalker unless for some reason they gave it 100% crit on Foot Stomp (if foot stomp even stayed). The issue is probably more that the devs don't consider it 'sneaky' enough, but they have been saying that about alot of things.

Gosh, but I hate that poor excuse for a... poor excuse.

Jets taking off: sufficiently sneaky.
Lightning storms: sufficiently sneaky.
Helicopter break-dancing with a 6-foot staff: sufficiently sneaky.
Punching people harder than usual: not sneaky enough.

/sign. Bulk MAD!! BULK SNEAK!!!

SS seems distinctly un-stalkerish in every way. Not the idea of a super strong stealther, but seriously look at that set. Clapping your hands really loudly to stun people, stomping your foot to make a giant shockwave, crazy fist swings, chucking rocks and the such.

This is one case where I don't really like the idea of proliferation. Let tankers and brutes have this one, guys.

What the heck is "jets taking off" supposed to be. It's not very descriptive of any power set I know of. If you're talking about Kinetic Melee, I really don't know how that set isn't stalkerish. If anything it's just a poor sound effect choice, nothing about that set tells me that a stalker would never fight that way.

Electric Armor is not a "lightning storm". They don't even get the damage aura, they just get lightningy. And with the ability to go invisible I don't really see how this is comparable to a set that is basically defined by making the hugest attacks possible and using your strength to recklessly smash everything.

The staff melee comparison is silly too. Granted the final move is a bit crazy and overdone, it's still something I can imagine a sneaky guy doing.

The question here is why do you want to devalue archetype concepts so much? I personally don't like seeing concepts destroyed and I like the idea of archetypes having differences in their sets that homogenize them less.

I've said my piece. Super Strength is not a set I'd personally see as suitable for a stalker. It's basically designed to be the set where the user tries to get everybody's attention with the biggest and loudest moves possible with no room for discreetness. No point in trying to explain every point about how moves with similar functions have a vastly different feel and style.

Batman regularly busts out moves that look right at home in the Super Strength power list.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dispari I don't know why Dink thinks she's not as sexy as Jay was. In 5 posts she's already upstaged his entire career.

You have a point, but there's a point where sets obviously don't fit. There's a point, I think, where a concept just doesn't make any sense anymore.

Obviously there's nothing wrong with a super strong sneakster, but a set like street justice can fit that mold anyways. You have to be super strong to be able to defeat supervillains with that.

As for Super Strength, the style of the set is... I just can't see it being a stalker set in any way. You've got a concept for a character who's a stalker who smashes around and chucks rocks and claps his hands really hard and uses brute force with totally indisciplined attacks... I really can't see it.

The problem here I guess is the idea of Stalkers is just messed up. Somebody mentioned being able to go along without Hide and perform just fine basically means Stalkers are just Scrappers with slightly different toys.

I'd really rather like to see Stalkers get more unique stuff and be tweaked to be more unique rather than giving them super strength and shove them further towards being Scrappers 2.0.

Archetypes having unique sets, I think, can be a good thing. As long as it's not stopping other archetypes from getting very generic things like elementals. And don't say "Super Strength" is one of those things. Super Strength is also represented by Street Justice, which is far more fitting for the sneaky and scrappy types. The set we have, Super Strength, is definitely designed for the brute-force tank kind of character, it's a very broad term but the set we have to represent it shows a very specific kind of fighting.

SR to Tankers kinda seemed like an odd choice to me. Katana for brutes really isn't much of a stretch to me. I can still see it fitting the archetype. A dodgy tank is just weird though. It's at least discreet though.

If we're going to completely abandon the idea of archetypes being unique in anyway, then whatever, give Stalkers Super Strength. Throw in Stone Melee / Armor while we're at it. Why not, I'm sure somebody could fit that into their concept. I know the concept has been gradually eroding but I'd like to see archetype uniqueness make a comeback, and this is something I'd hate to see happen in that regard.

Could be.

You really shouldn't have these discussions in such a "competitive" light. It's subjective, sure, and I'm giving my opinion. If you disagree, fine.

Just post your opinions and let the devs sort out who they think is right. This comes down to their subjective decision.

Except not. I want more AT uniqueness, you want less. I'd rather dev resources going towards that. And thus the disagreement.

Oh, and as for AT identity, I'm not being inconsistent. I'm going with the official definition of Stalkers and the one I'd really hope to be maintained and built upon.

Fair enough. I don't have much more to add, at this point.

Stealth is a tactic, not a theme. Just because I'm strong doesn't' mean my character should be incapable of seeing the advantages of entering a room quietly and taking out enemies with some level of forethought. Stealth has little do with how strong you are anyway, and much more to do with how well you take bullets to the face. Now, I don't know about you, but for me it doesn't matter if I where armed with a pistol or a rocket launcher; I'm still going to try to get the element of surprise because I *can't* take bullets to the face very well.

"Core of your specialty" being the key word. Anybody can take the Stealth powerset, but it doesn't make you a Stalker.

I had long given up on the concept that Stalkers = Stealth anyway. Because it only ever matters if the foe remains unknowing and if the foe remains unknowing, most likely they die without a fight. Not only is that not entertaining in a comic book or movie, it's not fair in a game.

I turned my view of Stalkers to that of an 'ambusher' and 'misdirector'. One can ambush an aware foe through misdirection, frankly that is all that is needed to differentiate Stalkers. In my opinion, this has nothing to do with how big, loud and flashy a power is...because you can use these exact effects to your advantage to better offset your opponent. Be it a subtle smoke powder in the eyes, a well targeted flashbang to disorient and confuse, a walloping crash to unhinge their resolve or a synaptic overload to cause the targets to flinch, it all can work to an ambusher's advantage. The difference being, a tanker may do that to grab attention, a brute to let off steam, while the stalker uses it to open opportunity.

Of course, that isn't how the game actually plays out, but the point still stands. It's too late to bother preserving AT uniqueness. I suggested making the theme sets unique when proliferating before proliferation started (that is, each AT would have a unique version of Fire Melee, etc) but it didn't happen. Now it's too late. To bother struggling for theme now, you might as well be struggling to unproliferate sets which is *NOT* going to happen.

Dropping "Foot Stomp" from the list and adding "Sucker Punch" in for the Assassin Strike should make it work just fine.

I am all for it!

I consider Stalkers more "Assassin's Creed" and less "Thief". If you played those games you know that while AC might utilize stealth a good portion of the time, you can definitely expect to have large stylish battles as part of the main campaign. Contrast that to Thief which places a much greater emphasis on stealth and would reward such brazen tactics with numerous death-holes. The pacing for both games is naturally appropriate with AC being very quick, even during it's stealth parts, and Thief involving a lot more tense waiting and near masochistic patrol memorization.

I think perhaps in the beginning Stalkers may have been designed with a more 'subtle' play style in mind, but it quickly became apparent that the mechanics of the entire rest of the game didn't really suite them. Just being invisible isn't enough stealth 'game-play' to make them work. You would need the AI to have patrols, to have cones of vision, to be sensitive to light and darkness, to understand sound, to investigate noises... The entire game would literally need to be re-built with stealth in mind and even then that isn't going to work when a brute with a fist full of lightning can still come crashing into the room like a mad god.

Stalkers, as they are currently, work well within the confines of the game to convey the idea of a more elegant and stealthier version of a Scrapper. Someone who can still perform well in an upfront battle, but becomes an unfathomable boogey-man when stealth is an option. To me and how I like to play stealth games that is about perfect, the only thing missing is more powersets to play around with.