Crimson Dance is bad - please buff it

"

Revnaut wrote:

I think it mostly depends on the skill you're using. Almost all of those 26% gladiators are using Lacerate. Doesn't make much sense to get Crimson Dance for EQ.

Which is funny. I just took another look and 26% of gladiators take Lacerate. 26 and 26 lol.

"

Noble_Seiken wrote:

This is why I think if they reduced the maximum # of bleed stacks to 3 or 4 and removed the damage reduction, it could work for everybody.

I also think a possibility could be if the enemy isn't moving, the 50% less bleeding damage shouldn't apply. If they are, it should.

In other words, you suggest:

Crimson Dance
You can inflict Bleeding on an Enemy up to 4 times
Your Bleeding damage deals extra Damage while the Enemy is stationary instead
x% Less damage with Bleeding

(positioning of "instead" may vary)

This would surely keep the "alternative style" Crimson Dance is trying to give to bleed builds: instead of the "hit & run", you are actively giving a sense to close-combat melee (once again, "close combat" is to be intended as "the melee type that is not Ancestral Totems, Reave, Lacerate and whatever hits the enemy from afar") to use Bleeding instead of, say, Poison (which, while it promotes high attack speed builds, it still deals Chaos damage rather than Physical, thus breaking a bit the whole Gladiator style).

As for the x%, I propose 65% in order to compensate,



Of course, one can just keep the 50% Less Damage and still end up with 35%-150% while enemy is moving and 105%-420% while stationary, but perhaps that would be a tad too much of an advantage over regular bleeding. Virtually, we are looking for an alternative, not a better way to do something.

Have I got it right? Because sure enough I myself like where these numbers are going.

"

Maxtrux wrote:

"

Noble_Seiken wrote:

This is why I think if they reduced the maximum # of bleed stacks to 3 or 4 and removed the damage reduction, it could work for everybody.

I also think a possibility could be if the enemy isn't moving, the 50% less bleeding damage shouldn't apply. If they are, it should.

In other words, you suggest:

Crimson Dance
You can inflict Bleeding on an Enemy up to 4 times
Your Bleeding damage deals extra Damage while the Enemy is stationary instead
x% Less damage with Bleeding

(positioning of "instead" may vary)

This would surely keep the "alternative style" Crimson Dance is trying to give to bleed builds: instead of the "hit & run", you are actively giving a sense to close-combat melee (once again, "close combat" is to be intended as "the melee type that is not Ancestral Totems, Reave, Lacerate and whatever hits the enemy from afar") to use Bleeding instead of, say, Poison (which, while it promotes high attack speed builds, it still deals Chaos damage rather than Physical, thus breaking a bit the whole Gladiator style).

As for the x%, I propose 65% in order to compensate,

and here is my reasoning

By using Wikia as reference...

"

Potential damage from one bleed application is based on the base physical damage of attack that caused it: 70% per second if the target is standing still (10% if an enemy monster applied it), if the target is moving bleeding deals additional damage equal to twice the base, for a total of 3 times base damage while moving (210%) [2].

[...]

If Crimson Dance is allocated, potential damage of one application is 35% of base attack's physical damage regardless of whether the target is moving or not, and 8 strongest application deal damage. Sustaining all 8 stacks on a target will deal in total 280% of average attack's base physical damage per second. This effectively quadruples bleed DPS in prolonged fights.

...and considering Crimson Dance's effect actually increase Bleeding Damage over standard bleeding (at the cost of constantly hitting the enemy to refresh stacks), it's reasonable to use a x% that actually ends up dealing more than the 210% damage Bleeding does to moving enemies - only, we have to work the other way around and make sure we top this value while enemy is stationary. By using 65%, each Bleeding stack would inflict 25% of Physical Damage, for a total of 100% if we go for 4 stacks, which is raised to 75% (300% with full stacks) as long as the enemy is stationary.

Of course, one can just keep the 50% Less Damage and still end up with 35%-150% while enemy is moving and 105%-420% while stationary, but perhaps that would be a tad too much of an advantage over regular bleeding. Virtually, we are looking for an alternative, not a better way to do something.

Have I got it right? Because sure enough I myself like where these numbers are going.

I like your ideas. This is a good conversation.
I was actually not hoping to combine the two ideas into one. They exist separate in my mind still.
The idea behind CD is that "we will reward you for bleeding multiple times", like the gladiator who patiently opens the small veins of his opponent until he drops from the LoB. Unfortunately, not many people play like that. It's a hit hard and fast - "make money, slay bitches" kind of mentality in this game. The only people who take it are Lacerate Gladiators (>90%) just because the fast nature of Lacerate lends itself to it - You can't go wrong with CD and Lacerate, so it's not really a choice.
I. don't. know. how to suggest a change for CD that would really garner support, just because the player mentality is not there.

maybe because CD doesnt require a change?

it is not for 'bleed builds'. it is a keystone that is VERY strong on a normal, phys hit melee build that somehow managed to get high chance to bleed. it is literally free damage and not an insignificant one

what makes this not an auto-pick is a) herd mentality that dictates that you go bleed OR impale. people somehow cannot fathom that you can do both.. b) getting 80% chance to bleed on a non-bleed build IS difficult.

take POB, take any phys hit build and give yourself 100% chance to bleed + CD and see how much damage youve just gotten 'for free'. there is a reason why pretty much all 'red' support gems give you more phys damage and more bleeding/phys ailment damage.

"

sidtherat wrote:

maybe because CD doesnt require a change?

it is not for 'bleed builds'. it is a keystone that is VERY strong on a normal, phys hit melee build that somehow managed to get high chance to bleed. it is literally free damage and not an insignificant one

what makes this not an auto-pick is a) herd mentality that dictates that you go bleed OR impale. people somehow cannot fathom that you can do both.. b) getting 80% chance to bleed on a non-bleed build IS difficult.

take POB, take any phys hit build and give yourself 100% chance to bleed + CD and see how much damage youve just gotten 'for free'. there is a reason why pretty much all 'red' support gems give you more phys damage and more bleeding/phys ailment damage.

CD is taken by <2% of non- "bleed builds", so I don't see how this is statistically relevant. Are you saying this because this applies to you?

2% usage nor 20% usage is not an argument. people eat junk food and that doesnt make that decision smart nor 'good'

what would make it 'bad' is math, numbers, well described use scenarios where it flops. aka proving that it is bad.

CD is 'fit for its purpose', ive used it. try doing the math yourself, POB might help (but it still to this day calculates it weirdly). CD is just not a keystone you want it to be. thats fair. but that doesnt mean it is bad

"

sidtherat wrote:

2% usage nor 20% usage is not an argument. people eat junk food and that doesnt make that decision smart nor 'good'

Geez i really hope that you are actually Sidtherats younger brother or something who is just using his account because otherwise you just made yourself guilty of overloading my hypocrisy detector to the point where it blew up.

You've used POE Ninja statistics as an argument for your "balance is shit" and "melee is shit" campaigns in roughly 90% of the posts i've ever seen from you and now your going with the "statistics don't matter because of herd mentality" line? That's essentially invalidating everything you've ever posted here.

And as far as "use math to prove you wrong" goes, i actually went through the trouble of checking POB to see how wrong that statement actually was. My Champion has 71% chance to bleed and would need 2 points to allocate CD and it would be a horrible choice as most generic minor damage nodes provide more damage than CD. So much for math, i don't think i want to know what kind of absurdity of a build made you make that statement but it certainly doesn't hold true for proper builds.

"

sidtherat wrote:

2% usage nor 20% usage is not an argument. people eat junk food and that doesnt make that decision smart nor 'good'

Seconded. The fact something is largely used does not imply it is of high quality. It's called bandwagon effect - something becomes relevant or strong because many people use it. Strengh in number, not in actual muscle. Still... Thane Jorgin would say it is still strenght. He is not wrong about it. I mean, look at vermins.

"

Noble_Seiken wrote:

I like your ideas. This is a good conversation.

Thank you! I try to reason when possible, and thankfully I've got plenty of patience.

"

Noble_Seiken wrote:

The idea behind CD is that "we will reward you for bleeding multiple times", like the gladiator who patiently opens the small veins of his opponent until he drops from the LoB.

This is surely another way to see CD, one that I did not have before and that makes a lot of sense in my head. Perhaps in this case it could be better to give bleeding some more of an utility effect? Something like +x% increase physical damage taken for each bleeding on an enemy (to add to the current CD setup), or perhaps something hybrid like the recent Crushed status to add with bleeding.
What I fear is that giving bleeding this kind of bonus should be more related to ascendancies rather than Keystone. I won't be too much surprised if GGG somehow revamps Deadeye in order to be an alternative to bleed builds instead of just Gladiator, which honestly do not fit very well the idea of a bowyer - and the loss of all the small ascendancy passives is significant in this case.

"

Noble_Seiken wrote:

Unfortunately, not many people play like that. It's a hit hard and fast - "make money, slay bitches" kind of mentality in this game. The only people who take it are Lacerate Gladiators (>90%) just because the fast nature of Lacerate lends itself to it - You can't go wrong with CD and Lacerate, so it's not really a choice.

I actually would not use CD with Lacerate - but I surely would with Double Strike. I still think Lacerate should be used as a ranged skill, even though the game itself tries to be difficult against those kind of approach (see a non-deep delve build that needs to go delving because they cannot monetize their Sulphite and, well, Niko happens sometimes). That said, I did not use my chance with Harvest for doing a physical character that could use Lacerate, and I don't think I will ever have another chance, with my playstile, to test in on a League in the future, so I could be all wrong with how Lacerate actually works ingame.

"

Noble_Seiken wrote:

I. don't. know. how to suggest a change for CD that would really garner support, just because the player mentality is not there.

While indeed player's mentality is something that can be changed, and with Delirium and all the timer-related mechanics it's definitely oriented to "Die quickly, you're ruining my kills average", it should also be worth mentioning there are suboptimal yet different ways to play the endgame experience. GGG tried it first in Prophecy with the introduction of DoT-related spells (ED/Contagion), then did a very interesting job in Harvest with the introduction of the "bonkstick" - There are now players that are more focused in having the highest AVG rather than the highest possible DPS. I cannot turn a blind eye to this.

It's noble to you try to get the support of the playerbase, but remember it's impossible to satisfy everyone. Merely changing how CD works now, as seen by other players who chimed in this thread, would upset Lacerate builds - whether I can't say if as a minor setback or a major trouble/RIP build.
Keep in mind what the Keystone is supposed to do - provide an alternative yet generic bleeding experience -, think about how exactly it fails to do so (or does it poorly) and try to make a suggestion without caring about how players would react at first. Forums are meant to share ideas, after all and - well, if it fails to change CD, perhaps they could make a different Keystone that gives an alternative to standrd bleeding AND Crimson Dance?
In order to land a mark, you have at the very least to shoot an arrow ^^

reserved

statistics.. taking a number that describes one thing and forcing it to mean something else is not statistics. or rather - it is not 'statistics' that you can earn a living from. it is just internet charlatanry

numbers you quote describe usage. not quality/strenght/power. low value might IMPLY something is bad. but it might mean that something has not yet been understood/popularised. or might mean something is expensive or a direct competition is better/easier to gear.

(good example of a skill that has TWO users, not even %'s - Magma Orb. and it is a skill that combines good clear, EXTREME single target with pinpoint+intensify rework and lots of scaling avenues. two players. i challenge anyone to call Magma Orb 'bad'..)

once again, do some math (but please, do it properly, POB doesnt understand CD and is pretty misleading with bleeds/DoT in general) then come here discussing numbers. if you want to make GGG listen (here? use reddit for that) you have to bring numbers to the game, not some veiled innuendos


this keystone - in some builds - is a direct more damage multiplier. it is bit weaker phys EleOverload, EO is both easier to trigger and much easier to understand without digging deep. but both serve the same purpose. you get 'mild yet cheap' damage bonus for the price of not going for the real deal