These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#1381 - 2013-09-01 19:28:46 UTC
Just Lilly wrote:
CCP should add +2 warpstrength to all marauders, they are suppose to be annoying and harassing

+5 warpstrength while in bastion mode

Just for laughs Blink

Perhaps +1 warp-strength has merit in allowing a pilot to actually make use of a MJD before turning into a wreck
and the +5 might as well be +9000 warp-strength in bastion mode for all the good and just for the lulz. If CCP adds this +9000 warp-strength I wont cancel my account as a result of ruining the ship class id like to pvp in.
kahn liam
Isk Printing LLC.
Evil.Tech
#1382 - 2013-09-01 19:54:56 UTC
Don't get rid of the pali/kronos webs! way more usefull then some increase in turret falloff, imo.
Marc McIntyre Crendraven
Knights Reborn
#1383 - 2013-09-01 20:03:48 UTC
I don't think i have ever used the stasis bonus on the paladin, frigs hardly ever get that close so the optimal range bonus makes more sense. as for the kronos, i prefer the fall-off bonus but the web bonus is still useful.

Eat Lead!!! Err....Antimatter...whatever!

kahn liam
Isk Printing LLC.
Evil.Tech
#1384 - 2013-09-01 20:27:26 UTC  |  Edited by: kahn liam
Marc McIntyre Crendraven wrote:
I don't think i have ever used the stasis bonus on the paladin, frigs hardly ever get that close so the optimal range bonus makes more sense. as for the kronos, i prefer the fall-off bonus but the web bonus is still useful.

it's pretty usefull for using in conjunction with blap dreads and cheaper then vindis....

granted with the complete roll change they might not even be used for that any longer, but still i'd rather the webs then the falloff. maybe that's just me.
Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#1385 - 2013-09-01 20:27:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Nano Quantum
I been wondering if CCP devs explored the possibility of making a marauder mode that instead of making the Marauders into fixed weapons mode it made them extremely fast and agile with damage/tracking bonuses. If its possible id like to know if the devs explored this and what their experiments rendered in terms of ship balance. Sensor strength increase seems like something that should have been looked into and wondering if and what the results were as well in terms of balance or the imbalance it created.
Gabriel Karade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#1386 - 2013-09-01 20:28:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Gabriel Karade
Marc McIntyre Crendraven wrote:
I don't think i have ever used the stasis bonus on the paladin, frigs hardly ever get that close so the optimal range bonus makes more sense. as for the kronos, i prefer the fall-off bonus but the web bonus is still useful.
Not having the web bonus is a major kick in the teeth, because that translates to a 400% increase in target velocity. If they want to give the Kronos a 400% bonus to blaster tracking to compensate I'm down with that, but I very much doubt it would happen....

Also there is a ridiculous assertion in this thread that the 90% web bonus was overpowered:

Large blasters are an oddity - sub 10km optimal on a very slow platform, fundamentally only really works if you can pin down any targets straying in range to near stationary. Overpowered? not really, because you simply kite said slow, lumbering platform outside of 13km. I should also point out, from the perspective of someone who extensively flew blasterthrons back in the day of 90% webs (2004-2008), that it was still perfectly viable back then to get in under the guns in frigate sized platforms (heck if you got close enough in a cruiser you could still mess up tracking sufficiently), the only recourse the blasterthron pilot had was to 'tickle' the MWD to attempt to pull a little bit of range.

In the days of MWD-killing scrams, boosted afterburners, and tracking disrupters bolted into spare mid slots, 90% webs on a lumbering vulnerable Battleship platform are in no way overpowered.

P.s back in the day the Kronos had 99% webs....

War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293

kahn liam
Isk Printing LLC.
Evil.Tech
#1387 - 2013-09-01 20:29:56 UTC
Nano Quantum wrote:
I been wondering if CCP devs explored the possibility of making a marauder mode that instead of making the Marauders into fixed weapons mode it made them extremely fast and agile with damage/tracking bonuses. If its possible id like to know if the devs explored this and what their experiments rendered in terms of ship balance.


The last thing EVE balance needs is another "fast skirmish" situation, since this role is decidedly cramped thanks to a plethora of ships that excel at it.
Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#1388 - 2013-09-01 20:40:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Nano Quantum
kahn liam wrote:
Nano Quantum wrote:
I been wondering if CCP devs explored the possibility of making a marauder mode that instead of making the Marauders into fixed weapons mode it made them extremely fast and agile with damage/tracking bonuses. If its possible id like to know if the devs explored this and what their experiments rendered in terms of ship balance.


The last thing EVE balance needs is another "fast skirmish" situation, since this role is decidedly cramped thanks to a plethora of ships that excel at it.

I suppose if they did not explore this possible alternative mode this would be a very valid reason for not doing so since there are ships that fit that more or less. It would be telling however to know how much concept testing they did into changing this class. The lack of sensor strength changes also puzzles me somewhat in that it is the one thing this class is seriously crippled by for PVP use.
Razefummel
Unknown Dimension
#1389 - 2013-09-01 21:46:27 UTC
Maybe this incredible Idea was from "CCP EA" because EA was known for its perfectly balanced Game Mechanics and Units in their Games... who knows?

I donĀ“t like the Idea of the "Cynobaiting Highsec-Dreads" witch is presented here...

250.000 Skillpunkte gratis zum Start:

Buddyinvite

Unknown Dimension Forum

Big rEy
Militaris Industries
Northern Coalition.
#1390 - 2013-09-01 21:48:12 UTC
The bastion does not make a marauder strong enough for incursions or level 5, and it does not make it faster in L4.
Don't care about PvP. It's a marauder. It's for PvE.
I do like the transformation thing, but without a damage buff, it's useless. My character has 4.6 mil SP, most of them in scan & salvaging and I still can do The Assault and Worlds Collide without problems in a 1.2 bil RNI and the bonus room from angel/guristas extravaganza it's a joke for my tank. A golem will be even better at tanking. So it's not a necesity to bring more tank ( I do not complain, I like it, more it's better) for PvE and the pourpres of a marauder, it will be better to give more dps, or even better to give both tank and dps.
Now, the bastion it's a bonus in PvP in my noob/new player opinion but how can you fight in a marauder vs 2 bs + decent logi with just 1.400 DPS in a torp golem? If you want to be used in PVP, make the bastion module give some damage buffs.
The golem have gained +200mil on jita, from 0.95 to over 1.25 bil since this announce. It's too expensive, more than a pirate BS, so why would not be better than one?
And if ccp is working on marauders, make the range bonus of tractor beam better. 60-70km ore more :P
Just my opinion as a new and inexperienced player of eve online.
Cassius Invictus
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1391 - 2013-09-01 22:09:52 UTC
Big rEy wrote:
The bastion does not make a marauder strong enough for incursions or level 5, and it does not make it faster in L4.
Don't care about PvP. It's a marauder. It's for PvE.
I do like the transformation thing, but without a damage buff, it's useless. My character has 4.6 mil SP, most of them in scan & salvaging and I still can do The Assault and Worlds Collide without problems in a 1.2 bil RNI and the bonus room from angel/guristas extravaganza it's a joke for my tank. A golem will be even better at tanking. So it's not a necesity to bring more tank ( I do not complain, I like it, more it's better) for PvE and the pourpres of a marauder, it will be better to give more dps, or even better to give both tank and dps.
Now, the bastion it's a bonus in PvP in my noob/new player opinion but how can you fight in a marauder vs 2 bs + decent logi with just 1.400 DPS in a torp golem? If you want to be used in PVP, make the bastion module give some damage buffs.
The golem have gained +200mil on jita, from 0.95 to over 1.25 bil since this announce. It's too expensive, more than a pirate BS, so why would not be better than one?
And if ccp is working on marauders, make the range bonus of tractor beam better. 60-70km ore more :P
Just my opinion as a new and inexperienced player of eve online.


Sry Mate, but you really don't see any advantages in lvl 4 mission running with proposed changes? The ECM immunity alone will make a lot of missions much much faster. Increased range also.

CCP, just and idea: why don't you add a 50% damage bonus to racial SMALL weapons. How would you like to see marauder fitted with mixed weaponry (as a true battleship should)? It would compensate for web and drone loss, allow for alternate use of high slots, and make a unique and fun ship.
Teantis
The Greater Goon
Clockwork Pineapple
#1392 - 2013-09-01 22:14:42 UTC
I honestly can't see this as turning marauders into anything except more gimmicky versions of what they already are. The bastion module is going to have very limited use in actual PVP because an increase in active tank, sizable though it is, isn't worth the tradeoff in terms of mobility, especially on a battleship size hull. Battleships are already very vulnerable to blap dreads, and making them stationary will only make them more so, especially since active tanks don't really do anything to combat a ship that can just straight up alpha you off the field. The MJD bonus is similarly gimmicky, as they're mainly used in larger fleets where marauders are cost-prohibitive. Also, removing the web bonus from the paladin and kronos, which is the main reason you see any marauders used in pvp at all at this time, strikes me as a bad idea if you want to encourage them to be used in pvp in the first place.

With that said, the bastion mode is going to be hilarious for pve, where you'll be able to get a null kronos with a ridiculous active tank applying damage reliably at 60km, rather than the 35 or so you max out at now. It'll especially make doing the serpentis sites with the rats that orbit at ~50km much less painful in a kronos, and you won't really miss the webs, which I personally very rarely used while doing sites with the kronos anyway, because you can replace them with double TCs instead.

In all I don't think these changes will actually achieve your goal of more marauders used in pvp, but will make them hilarious pve rapemachines.
MBizon Osis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1393 - 2013-09-01 22:14:52 UTC
This is going to be a composite post made of several separate quotes I feel are a cogent analysis of the Dev's proposed marauder changes.

"You are wrecking both the Kronos and Paladin by removing a key element: the web bonuses, plus gimping all of them in DPS by nerfing the drone bays."
"and lose DPS because the drone bandwidth is one third of what it was."
'DPS=drones + turrets/launchers
Give them all the ability to use heavies/sentires. that would help to bridge the gap as mentioned above"
"i would agree that losing the drones and web buff would just make these a huge liability in PvE, yeah you could tank for a long time but that will do little to help you deal with the frigs that get close and keep you scrammed and webbed. would make marauders mostly a liability in a mission"
"the thing that keeps them on the side line for PvP now is their stupidly low sensor strength. no point bringing in a bs that can easily be perma jammed by 1 flight of light ecm drones."
"Now that I look at it again, the drone bay thing is really hideous. The Vindicator has 11 effective turrets and 125mbit drone bandwidth. Please give these at least 100mbit/175m3."
"I think if you wanted to see these ships in PVP all you had to do was increase the sensor strength and make no other changes whatsoever. They were fine."
"I prefer the same flexibility with mediums too. So, 2 flights of lights, 2 flights of mediums, and 1 flight of salvage ... :) Too much to ask for?75 for the lights + salvage ... then 100 more for the medium drone options for Amarr and Galente. :)"
"The MJD bonus is okay, but it doesn't resolve the main reason why Marauders aren't used in PvP; the fact that a frigate with 5 light ECM drones can keep a Marauder permanently jammed, due to it's horrid sensor strength. And since they can be so easily jammed, no one wants to risk a 700 mil ship that can be completely neutralized. You want to fix them? Make their sensor strength the same or better than their T1 variants. You will then see them in more fleets."
"Paladin needs the cap bonus changed. Bake that into the hull, then add something else. A tracking bonus would be nice, especially without drones. "
"I fly the Kronos more then any other ship in eve, and i am training the Paladin now.
Tell me what is the point of killing anything outside of 40KM range in a ship that cant move. Your making it so stuff takes longer.
And a nerf to the drones??
At the moment i fly with a set of salvage, scout and change between a set of 5 medium or 3 heavy/sentry drones.
I always thought this ship would be getting more drone ability, not less.
Not one of these changes has addressed that fact that other (pirate) ships do better then these ships.
The changes seem great for PVP
But not one single person who has trained these skills for this ship has done so for this reason.
I think you are giving new people a reason to train these at the expensive of everyone that trained these for their original purpose."
"No offense, highsec mission runners didn't need this. IMHO leaivng the tank alone and increasing the damage output of marauders over other BSes would have been far more useful as you would still have your "ultimate carebearmobile" but it would also be usable by lowsec/nullsec mission runners, nullsec ratters, and even good in some classes of wormholes."
"i would have been happy if all they did was increase the PG and left the rest the same.... If you want to be this radical, the dps boost should be added to bastion mode. And why you gotta take away my drones? i like not taking years to kill PVE frigates.....thats just a smack in the face. Its not like they give use damage boost"
"Second, wrecking the drone bay is simply dumb. People use that for Sentry DPS, or salvage drones. Why are you gimping the effective DPS on these ships? And please don't talk to me about how the improved range on guns will improve effective DPS. On long range stuff, sure. But try running Buzzkill, or the 2nd room of Worlds Collide, where stuff is ON TOP of you, when you land."
"Really doesn't make sense to reduce the drone bay space so drastically on these big ships.. it's nonsense, please don't do it, the reduction in drone bandwidth is just as ridiculous."
A big +1 to every one of these points of view.
Thank you
MB
Big rEy
Militaris Industries
Northern Coalition.
#1394 - 2013-09-01 22:16:15 UTC
Cassius Invictus wrote:

Sry Mate, but you really don't see any advantages in lvl 4 mission running with proposed changes? The ECM immunity alone will make a lot of missions much much faster. Increased range also.

Yeah...you are right. I am used to fight guristas and their target jamming it's not something bad as long as I have some Auto-Targeting Cruise Missile. Wich I've always had just in case.Evil
Tratari
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1395 - 2013-09-01 22:24:09 UTC
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
Zeus Maximo wrote:
Mournful Conciousness wrote:


no mate. Micro WARP drive, so you can burn back to gate. Not micro JUMP drive
:-)


Even worse..... The other changes he suggested would diminish webbing effects on the ship. Even then.... How would one stop one of these ships from getting away?


That's rather the point. It gives PVE players a chance to do pve in hostile space....


Who in their right mind is gonna solo PVE in hostile space with a 1.2b ISK hull?
Daniel Plain
Doomheim
#1396 - 2013-09-01 22:31:21 UTC
MBizon Osis wrote:
This is going to be a composite post made of several separate quotes I feel are a cogent analysis of the Dev's proposed marauder changes.

"You are wrecking both the Kronos and Paladin by removing a key element: the web bonuses, plus gimping all of them in DPS by nerfing the drone bays."
"and lose DPS because the drone bandwidth is one third of what it was."
'DPS=drones + turrets/launchers
Give them all the ability to use heavies/sentires. that would help to bridge the gap as mentioned above"
"i would agree that losing the drones and web buff would just make these a huge liability in PvE, yeah you could tank for a long time but that will do little to help you deal with the frigs that get close and keep you scrammed and webbed. would make marauders mostly a liability in a mission"
"the thing that keeps them on the side line for PvP now is their stupidly low sensor strength. no point bringing in a bs that can easily be perma jammed by 1 flight of light ecm drones."
"Now that I look at it again, the drone bay thing is really hideous. The Vindicator has 11 effective turrets and 125mbit drone bandwidth. Please give these at least 100mbit/175m3."
"I think if you wanted to see these ships in PVP all you had to do was increase the sensor strength and make no other changes whatsoever. They were fine."
"I prefer the same flexibility with mediums too. So, 2 flights of lights, 2 flights of mediums, and 1 flight of salvage ... :) Too much to ask for?75 for the lights + salvage ... then 100 more for the medium drone options for Amarr and Galente. :)"
"The MJD bonus is okay, but it doesn't resolve the main reason why Marauders aren't used in PvP; the fact that a frigate with 5 light ECM drones can keep a Marauder permanently jammed, due to it's horrid sensor strength. And since they can be so easily jammed, no one wants to risk a 700 mil ship that can be completely neutralized. You want to fix them? Make their sensor strength the same or better than their T1 variants. You will then see them in more fleets."
"Paladin needs the cap bonus changed. Bake that into the hull, then add something else. A tracking bonus would be nice, especially without drones. "
"I fly the Kronos more then any other ship in eve, and i am training the Paladin now.
Tell me what is the point of killing anything outside of 40KM range in a ship that cant move. Your making it so stuff takes longer.
And a nerf to the drones??
At the moment i fly with a set of salvage, scout and change between a set of 5 medium or 3 heavy/sentry drones.
I always thought this ship would be getting more drone ability, not less.
Not one of these changes has addressed that fact that other (pirate) ships do better then these ships.
The changes seem great for PVP
But not one single person who has trained these skills for this ship has done so for this reason.
I think you are giving new people a reason to train these at the expensive of everyone that trained these for their original purpose."
"No offense, highsec mission runners didn't need this. IMHO leaivng the tank alone and increasing the damage output of marauders over other BSes would have been far more useful as you would still have your "ultimate carebearmobile" but it would also be usable by lowsec/nullsec mission runners, nullsec ratters, and even good in some classes of wormholes."
"i would have been happy if all they did was increase the PG and left the rest the same.... If you want to be this radical, the dps boost should be added to bastion mode. And why you gotta take away my drones? i like not taking years to kill PVE frigates.....thats just a smack in the face. Its not like they give use damage boost"
"Second, wrecking the drone bay is simply dumb. People use that for Sentry DPS, or salvage drones. Why are you gimping the effective DPS on these ships? And please don't talk to me about how the improved range on guns will improve effective DPS. On long range stuff, sure. But try running Buzzkill, or the 2nd room of Worlds Collide, where stuff is ON TOP of you, when you land."
"Really doesn't make sense to reduce the drone bay space so drastically on these big ships.. it's nonsense, please don't do it, the reduction in drone bandwidth is just as ridiculous."
A big +1 to every one of these points of view.
Thank you
MB


i cannot talk for incursion runners or pvp marauder folks but in missions anything more than a flight of lights (and maybe a flight of salvage drones) is absolutely irrelevant in terms of dps. i can see the kronos still having a flight of sentries because it's a gallente ship after all but the other three could have 25/50 bandwidth/bay and be perfectly fine, even before bastion bonuses. (i'm assuming current stats and the mjd bonus for convenience.)

I should buy an Ishtar.

Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1397 - 2013-09-01 22:35:40 UTC
I have a really good idea: instead of going forward with the proposal in the OP, reboot the entire T2 battleship lineup.

First, CCP should take the work that they've done on the proposed Marauders (the fancy new animations, siege-module-but-not concept, etc), ditch the MJD bonus and all pretenses of PvP usefulness, add a small damage bonus, further-reduce their mobility (make them handle more like a little capital ship than a battleship) and rename the ships "Vanguards" or something and play up the fact that they were designed specifically for destroying pirate encampments or whatever in their description. Go hog-wild and make the ultimate PvE battleship, while trading off qualities that would render them useful for PvP (mobility, buffer tank, ability to receive remote reps, etc) in exchange. Pick a specialization for this T2 hull and stick to it.

Then, having actually created a specialized T2 BS hull for PvE, take the Marauder class title, take re-skins of the formerly-tier 3 battleships, and make a class that's actually useful for PvP in hostile space. Make these ships similar to what blackops battleships are currently, but without the jump portal generators and with an obvious combat focus instead of the hodgepodge of attributes that current blops bs have:

- T1ish resists and average-to-light tanks: smaller than normal tanks for a battleship, with T1 resists to ensure that they can't be used effectively in large fleets with logi support
- Jump drive equipped, can jump to covert cynos
- CANNOT fit jump portal generators or covert cynos or take covert bridges
- 4 weapons, 75-100% damage boost from role bonus for 7-8 effective weapons
- 7 highs
- Bonuses to normal cloaking devices: -100% targeting delay after decloaking, -100% to cloak scan resolution penalty
- Takes blackops BS' current role bonus to ship velocity while cloaked
- Large drone bays regardless of available bandwidth, to allow for plenty of spare flights of drones
- Generous cargo bays (on the large side of the normal battleship range) plus fuel and ammunition bays, to allow the ship to carry enough consumables for extended use without resupplying
- Unusually high agility / speed for battleship hulls (make them handle like a battlecruiser)
- Damage output should be on the low end of the battleship damage spectrum (as blops BS are currently) in another effort to offset their mobility advantages

These ships would actually be good for using as heavier dps support in hostile space, having bonuses that allow them to stay a step ahead of their opponents, ambushing targets and hiding when necessary, while trading some of the damage output and tank that you'd normally get from a T1 battleship in exchange. They should be less at home in a straight up brawl than a T1 battleship (which will hopefully keep them within their niche role as part of a blackops gang rather than presenting a viable ship for large-scale deployment), but should really excel (for a battleship, anyway) at their "Marauding" role-- lurking about in hostile space and providing the muscle to quickly snuff out a target and run off again when opportunities present themselves. They won't be as evasive or mobile as something like a nano-HAC, but will provide more staying power in exchange.

Finally, revamp Blackops battleships to actually fit into more of a support role, instead of the current arrangement where they try to be half gang support, half combat ship while excelling at neither role:

- 4 weapons, 50% role bonus to damage for 6 effective turrets
- 7-8 highslots
- Jump drive equipped
- Fit covert ops cloaks (same as recon ships-- no scan res penalty, targeting delay after decloaking)
- Battlecruiser-like hitpoints
- Battlecruiser-like agility
- Miniature SMA sized to fit maybe a cruiser + a frigate, or several frigate hulls
- Fitting service accessible by one fleet member at a time-- force this to be an out-of-combat feature by making it only active when no modules are activated on the blackops battleship
- Large cargo hold, large fuel bay (larger than Marauders), large consumables bay (ammo, paste, charges, etc... maybe code it so that anchorable bubbles will go in as well)
- Bonuses to debuffs-- web range, neut range, etc much like recon hulls, but with smaller bonuses (leave recons as the last word in providing debuff support from stand-off ranges)
- Possibly a probing bonus a la recons as well?
- Mediocre to poor damage output for a battleship (6 effective turrets, single weapon bonus, tweak powergrid output and fitting requirements of covert jump portal generator such that it's difficult to fit a full rack of top-tier large guns as well as a bunch of neuts / support items in the utility highs)

Basically the idea here is to steer blackops away from DPS-oriented fits, making them a little more fragile than they currently are and reducing their damage output, while giving them a useful role to play as a provider of logistical and combat support to their gangs. Blackops will be better for sneaking about, doing recon tasks, will be able to bridge covert ships, and will be able to provide out-of-combat refitting support to their gang, as well as being able to haul along significantly more fuel and consumables than any other covert ship short of a blockade runner. When participating in combat directly, I'd prefer to see blackops function in more of a support role than they do currently, providing debuffs to inflict on hostile ships rather than significant DPS contributions-- they should be *part* of a gang composition for operating in hostile space, not the primary component.

Such a reboot of the T2 battleship lineup would result in a useful PvE-specialized ship, a useful direct combat PvP ship specialized for use in hostile space, and a sort of gang support ship specialized for use in hostile space to compliment a marauding T2 BS / recon / bomber group.
Battle Cube
Cube Collective
#1398 - 2013-09-01 22:41:32 UTC

Battle Cube wrote:

It makes a lot of sense to turn it into a short range high damage dealer when in bastion - possibly even give web bonuses to all of them - a sticky fly trap sort of ship or for close range damage like towers. The amount of time it takes to get out of this mode balances it, i think, for pvp as people can just get out if they werent webbed in the first place. Taking away the 'remote assistance and ewar' part would make it useful in incursions and pvp in general.

Its expense and skill time would make it difficult to use for huge fleet battles, and if it was used, it would be a gankmagnet for killmail whores, and if there was a fleet doctrine for it, then people would have to pay attention to phsycial location a bit more - i dont know if thats good or bad.


So yeah... id like to see it become a short range high damage dealer while immobile


-- or go even CRAZIER with it! Make it an "immobile weapons platform" and let it use capital weapons :D It would make it an ACTUAL stepping stone if they did that, possibly have the bastion module enable the capital guns so if you dont have it, you can still fit the ship with regular guns and simply not use bastion mode so it still has a purpose

and im guessing the hull animations are already done - but if they arent - the animation could be for revealing the capital turrets

and i mean its already been done with tier3 BCs, a higher weapon class on a smaller ship, it would be awesome :D


i just wanted to restate that perhaps in addition to having a siege mode like a dreadnought, it would be cool if they had other features that put you on a course towards capitals.

One of the current problems with the bastion module is that Because it modifies the regular mode, the regular mode is getting nerfed, and we aren't getting proper resists. Its just making regular mode useless. If the bastion module just allowed you to turn on capital modules already on the ship (capital weapons, capital tractor beam, dont know about others....) then it wouldn't have to nerf the regular mode when Not using the bastion module because in regular mode, you wouldnt be able to use those modules.

You could go even MORE INSANE by making 1 or 2 of them fighter/fighter bomber based XD But maybe thats a bit far. Either way we already have oversized weapons on tier3s.

Doing this would not only be awesome, but it would also make industrialists happy for the new need for capital modules and xlarge ammo
Gul Amarr
Orange County Cruisers
#1399 - 2013-09-01 22:46:14 UTC
Razefummel wrote:
Would someone PLEASE explain where this change has something comon with balancing ?
Just give the Marauder Class Battleships more Sensorstreingh and the PvP-Balancing is absolutly done.
just saying.

Greetings

Raze



No - CCPs aim is to make T2 ships less effective than T1 ships and adding some entirely useless gimmick-bonus to justify a tenfold price increse.

Remember HACs.
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children
TOHA Conglomerate
#1400 - 2013-09-01 23:17:46 UTC
Gul Amarr wrote:
Razefummel wrote:
Would someone PLEASE explain where this change has something comon with balancing ?
Just give the Marauder Class Battleships more Sensorstreingh and the PvP-Balancing is absolutly done.
just saying.

Greetings

Raze



No - CCPs aim is to make T2 ships less effective than T1 ships and adding some entirely useless gimmick-bonus to justify a tenfold price increse.

Remember HACs.


I liked your comment, because I agree with the marauder part. However, I am very pleased with the changes to HACs and will be using them extensively.

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".