These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Rubicon] Marauder rebalancing

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Abdullah Bahdoon
Doomheim
#1141 - 2013-08-31 17:05:34 UTC
Great job regarding the TPs . As for the bastion module , I think it's ok as it is for now (no cap or fuel usage). Concerning the skill needed to operate it, 5x or 6x time multiplier should do just fine for a subcapital hull .
Leskit
Pure Victory
#1142 - 2013-08-31 17:11:48 UTC
Kaeden Dourhand wrote:
Interesting radio silence from the dev side.

Are you disregarding the noise from the community CCP, or are you simply debating things internally atm?

the csm summer summit is just wrapped up, and probably the latter. I'd expect at best casual posts this weekend, or at worst, monday.
Flyinghotpocket
Small Focused Memes
Ragequit Cancel Sub
#1143 - 2013-08-31 17:13:09 UTC
for 1billion isk and will not be getting remote reps. i want t2 resistances. DAMMIT

Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro
Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
#1144 - 2013-08-31 17:21:44 UTC
Zaxix wrote:
Lephia DeGrande wrote:
I am a sadpuppy that 80% of this Thread is just ignorant or "to-stupid-to-read", please no changes CCP we dont want something New we just want just better and more expensive **** like in WoW, bigger is better, T3>T1 at any means give us MOAR!!!!!


Complaining about complaining. How meta


Look, if someone lacks any self-reflection you have to point that loud out.

Meet the Mario Kart 8 - Capsuleer Club Cup
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#1145 - 2013-08-31 17:24:01 UTC
Danica Fox wrote:
Lloyd Roses wrote:
hmskrecik wrote:
"What I could do with this ship" but "What if 1000 Goons fielded that ships against me" question. This question boils to, do you still want them to be as kickass as you say?


Atm: *Phew, could've been actual battleships*


this makes me loaugh hard! and its the truth too ^^

Did you two actually read what he wrote?

If most of the changes people have vomited up as alternatives came to be you'd be dead in the above situation in anything less than another Marauder fleet. His point is that the "better idea's" being thrown around would make Marauders the defacto fleet doctrine of any large alliance.

And he'd be correct in that.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Wrayeth
Inexorable Retribution
#1146 - 2013-08-31 17:28:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Wrayeth
In general I like the changes, though I'm not sure such a drastic speed reduction was necessary.

I do have one suggestion (which may have already been mentioned; thread is too long for me to read it all right now): change the Paladin optimal bonus to a tracking bonus. The reason being is that these ships are likely to be used in small gang actions more than massive fleets, and the optimal range bonus' utility isn't very useful when the targets are up close (as they are likely to be if your marauder has to go in and tackle because your gang isn't sufficiently large to have a group of dedicated tacklers). Moreover, pulse lasers already have excellent range. While this would be increased by the bonus, please keep in mind that these are battleship-class weapons and have a lot of trouble hitting smaller, faster targets. In small gang combat, the ability to track becomes much more important than a range bonus that has no utility against targets up close. Sure, you could MJD out to range, but then you can't provide tackling or energy neutralization assistance to the rest of your gang.

As a final note regarding that, all of the other marauders get a bonus to tracking or its equivalent, so the Paladin would seem to be the odd man out in that regard. While diversity is good, when it conflicts with the intended role of the ship (as I understand it), then it may need to be passed up for a more conventional bonus.
Kenrailae
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1147 - 2013-08-31 17:35:35 UTC
Kaeden Dourhand wrote:
Interesting radio silence from the dev side.

Are you disregarding the noise from the community CCP, or are you simply debating things internally atm?




Could be the weekend... and they're probably mostly at home. Life and stuff.




Add fuel. Every other module in the game similar to the bastion module requires fuel. Add fuel. Make it whatever you want, but add it and a fuel bay.


Also, don't decrease a skill time because it's inconvenient. Seige, triage, Logistics, Battleship, Marauders, Fleet boosting skills are all long. For a reason. Cause they're worth it. Add T2 Bastion when you get T1 bastion balanced, and leave it a long skill. Why? Cause it'll be worth it.


A slight damage increase while bastioned would be awesome too, but can't have everything, and as I understand it these ships are about projection more than raw DPS, though a DPS increase in the form of RoF does, to me, make more sense than an optimal or flight speed bonus.


All other changes on the marauders are very exciting. Keep up the Good work!



P.S. I want an Autobot symbol on my Kronos please :D

The Law is a point of View

The NPE IS a big deal
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#1148 - 2013-08-31 17:35:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Wrayeth wrote:
In general I like the changes, though I'm not sure such a drastic speed reduction was necessary.

I do have one suggestion (which may have already been mentioned; thread is too long for me to read it all right now): change the Paladin optimal bonus to a tracking bonus. The reason being is that these ships are likely to be used in small gang actions more than massive fleets, and the optimal range bonus' utility isn't very useful when the targets are up close (as they are likely to be if your marauder has to go in and tackle because your gang isn't sufficiently large to have a group of dedicated tacklers). Moreover, pulse lasers already have excellent range. While this would be increased by the bonus, please keep in mind that these are battleship-class weapons and have a lot of trouble hitting smaller, faster targets. In small gang combat, the ability to track becomes much more important than a range bonus that has no utility against targets up close. Sure, you could MJD out to range, but then you can't provide tackling or energy neutralization assistance to the rest of your gang.

As a final note regarding that, all of the other marauders get a bonus to tracking or its equivalent, so the Paladin would seem to be the odd man out in that regard. While diversity is good, when it conflicts with the intended role of the ship (as I understand it).

I had been wondering if perhaps the being completely immobile aspect of Bastion mode were dropped if that would make a huge difference in how people viewed it.

Perhaps leave the mass increase in place (as illogical as it is Smile) so that prop mods are of very limited use in Bastion mode, but allow normal movement otherwise (not including the ability to warp out). It's not a full Siege mode after all.

Either way, for a mobility limited hull either a tracking or a web bonus (preferably the former considering it's range capabilities) is probably going to end up being necessary for this to see much general acceptance as a useful concept.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#1149 - 2013-08-31 17:40:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Hey Wrayeth, as a side note, can you imagine the havok Burn Eden would have inflicted on Null Sec entry systems with this proposal?

A couple of bubbles and tackler/webbers at the gate, a couple of Marauders at 100km... the tears would be hilarious. Smile

Any fast tackle that managed to cover the distance alive would simply be neuted out, and if necessary they'd leave any time the liked. Then come back, cloak, and set the trap again.

They would have a field day.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Chainsaw Plankton
FaDoyToy
#1150 - 2013-08-31 17:41:54 UTC
Kaeden Dourhand wrote:
Interesting radio silence from the dev side.

Are you disregarding the noise from the community CCP, or are you simply debating things internally atm?


eh, its the weekend

@ChainsawPlankto on twitter
Wrayeth
Inexorable Retribution
#1151 - 2013-08-31 17:43:53 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
Hey Wrayeth, as a side note, can you imagine the havok Burn Eden would have inflicted on Null Sec entry systems with this proposal?

A couple of bubbles and tackler/webbers at the gate, a couple of Marauders at 100km... the tears would be hilarious. Smile


LOL, yeah. Pookie and Co. would've loved it! (And those of us who weren't part of Burn Eden would've hated it. Lol )
Kaeden Dourhand
Raven's Sway
#1152 - 2013-08-31 17:47:05 UTC
Leskit wrote:
Kaeden Dourhand wrote:
Interesting radio silence from the dev side.

Are you disregarding the noise from the community CCP, or are you simply debating things internally atm?

the csm summer summit is just wrapped up, and probably the latter. I'd expect at best casual posts this weekend, or at worst, monday.


Fair enough, cheers.
Azriel X
#1153 - 2013-08-31 17:52:31 UTC
Xqpvqsvs Qr'atyuqink wrote:
Zhilia Mann wrote:

stuff



ur math is somewhat wrong and u are failing to realize that missiles are not turrets and they need time to hit the target. Not even talking about situation where your targets is warping away before your missiles hit him. Moreover at longer range most of players are shooting more missiles than its needed, eg when u are firing another volley of missiles when previous is still in space flying to target. If that first volley finishes target, the second volley is not going to another target but just flying into space doing nothing.

If your missiles got 100km range with 10km/s and 10secs flight time, increasing speed by 25% will result in 12,5km/s speed * 10secs = 125km range

If your turrets got for example 100km optimal and 100km falloff, increasing both for 25% will make your optimal 100km + 25% = 125km and your fallof 100km + 25% = 125km, so u will be able to deal full damage at 125km and half damage at 250km.

Missiles cant do half damage at twice of their optimal since they dont have fallof. Your target can have 1 hp sitting at 1 meter above your missiles optimal and u wont kill him.

And dont say word about tracking since turrets got tracking issues only if target is close enought while missiles got their issues no matter if target is close or far away (explosion velocity thing). U can counter tracking on turreted ship by moving at proper direction (for example away from target), but u cant counter low explosion velocity of your missiles.


This is why missles are dead... V_V

Although apparently rumors are going around about new missile weapon upgrades soon to come.
Crysantos Callahan
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#1154 - 2013-08-31 17:54:56 UTC
I think it's good first step in rebalancing those ships, I'd suggest to give missile boats an explosion velocity bonus.

But the really reall really important thing is to make the bastion mode only work in low/null sec, don't make highsec carebearing even more attractive than it already is. This could be a good thing to lure people in lower sec
Jasmine Assasin
The Holy Rollers
#1155 - 2013-08-31 17:56:57 UTC

Some things I'd like to see looked at are;

A) An extra slot, a low for the Golem (at least) and maybe a mid for the others. My reasoning is that the Golem has the same maximum DPS as all the other Caldari missile Battleships and sacrificing a low for a DCII means I lose out on that damage and I would be better off sticking to a Navy Scorpion...It has a better slot layout, tank for days, and does the same DPS. Oh and it's faster so I can fit a prop mod and move around the field much more conveniently w/o a bunch of on the fly math. Yes I could fit a 4th BCU on the Golem but then the tank isn't as good as what I have now (unless I'm in transformer mode of course but why bother when base tank is enough the DPS doesn't improve at all or gets worse because of it?)...and I don't need to do tricks to keep doing the same job (or train Marauders V either...). For PvE the Golem tank is well more than enough now..

Just think you guys need to look into this a bit more.

B) Mass reduction, etc. I think all penalties need tied to the Bastion module and not to the ship hulls themselves. This means that players that use the hulls now can continue to do so without changing much but players that want to use the bastion module will gain the disadvantages and advantages of doing so as appropriate. This seems a lot more fair to the people that have trained these ships (and Marauders V) and use them on a regular bases and I doubt it would break anything for anybody else.
Samas Sarum
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#1156 - 2013-08-31 17:57:49 UTC
My immediate thoughts

(1) Why doesn't the Golem have a damage bonus like all others? If cruise missiles do too much damage, than fix cruise missiles as this always creates unneeded arguing in feedback threads. Can we please just give all ships a damage bonus if for no toher reason than so we don't derail feedback threads so easily?

(2) Why does the Paladin have a capacity bonus? The other ships have a damage application bonus, see #1 as to why this is a bad idea. If the Paladin needs a bonus to capacitor due to large energy weapons, then just bake it into the hull numbers.

(3) I agree with the previous posters, why do these ships still have a bonus to tractor beams? This was an archaic bonus from before Noctis days and is no longer needed or wanted.
Jasmine Assasin
The Holy Rollers
#1157 - 2013-08-31 17:58:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Jasmine Assasin
Crysantos Callahan wrote:
I think it's good first step in rebalancing those ships, I'd suggest to give missile boats an explosion velocity bonus.

But the really reall really important thing is to make the bastion mode only work in low/null sec, don't make highsec carebearing even more attractive than it already is. This could be a good thing to lure people in lower sec


  • Role Bonus: 100% bonus to cruise missile and torpedo damage, 100% bonus to range and velocity of tractor beams, 70% reduction in Micro Jump Drive reactivation delay

  • Caldari Battleship Skill Bonus:
    • 10% bonus to cruise missile and torpedo velocity
    5% bonus to cruise missile and torpedo explosion velocity per level

  • Marauders Skill Bonus:
    • 7.5% bonus to shield boost amount
    10% bonus to effectiveness of target painters per level

    Emphasis mine.
    Kaeden Dourhand
    Raven's Sway
    #1158 - 2013-08-31 17:59:59 UTC
    Crysantos Callahan wrote:
    I think it's good first step in rebalancing those ships, I'd suggest to give missile boats an explosion velocity bonus.

    But the really reall really important thing is to make the bastion mode only work in low/null sec, don't make highsec carebearing even more attractive than it already is. This could be a good thing to lure people in lower sec


    Do you even know what you're talking about?

    Marauders are fine for any content highsec can throw at them tank-wise. If you can't tank it in a marauder, you're doing it wrong.

    In incursions using these would even be super-bad since you can't get RR anymore.

    The defensive bonuses of the bastion mode are lost on highsec players, simply because it's overkill. Maybe you can fit a 4th weapon upgrade or something, to squeeze out an extra 50-100dps or so, but that's DPS lost anyway because of the removal of drone bandwith.
    Jasmine Assasin
    The Holy Rollers
    #1159 - 2013-08-31 18:02:24 UTC
    Kaeden Dourhand wrote:


    In incursions using these would even be super-bad since you can't get RR anymore.

    .


    Actually the numbers have already been ran, and with the right fit+implants the local tank will be about the same effectiveness as 12 incoming Scimitar reps with boost...
    Optimo Sebiestor
    The New Eden School of trade
    Organization of Skill Extracting Corporations
    #1160 - 2013-08-31 18:14:03 UTC
    Let's see here; CCP thinks theres too many highsec offline towers, what will they do about it..

    oh wait..