These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Katrina Oniseki
Oniseki-Raata Internal Watch
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
#2201 - 2013-09-04 21:14:08 UTC
Bullet Therapist wrote:
I kind of feel like marauders are being pushed into so many different directions here to try to fill roles that either other ships fill better, or don't really exist in the first place. I know CCP is trying, but it all seems so screwed up right now.

Instead of concentrating so hard on making marauders wildly different from pirate battleships and other parts of the ship line-up why don't they follow the rest of the t2 lineup, and make what changes are needed to keep them on course.

For instance, to separate them from pirate battleships look at what pirate battleships do well. All of the pirate ships have great dps, most are fairly fast (with the machariel being very fast) and three of them have fantastic ewar bonuses. Why not keep this to pirate battleships? If they need to be reworked a little then do so during the pirate rebalance, but keep things like 90% webs, web range, a neuts to pirate battleships.

Whats left over now for marauders? Well why not follow the assault ship/command ship lineup. Keep the marauder's dps about the same, but emphasize their tank and application, but do so without utterly pidgeonholeing the class. Get rid of all of all of the ewar bonuses. ALL of them. No bonus to webs, none to target painters. Just drop them. If we want them, we'll fit them, just don't make us feel like we have to in order to optimize the ship. When you think about ship bonuses realize that people are going to use long and short range weapons on the ship. Keep this in mind. A web bonus is less of a help to people using long range weapons than it is to someone who uses short range ones.

Here's a sample of something that makes sense.

GOLEM

• Role Bonus: 100% bonus to cruise missile and torpedo damage. 70% reduction in Micro Jump Drive reactivation delay. Can fit Bastion modules.

• 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:
5% bonus to the cruise missile and torpedo explosion velocity per level
4% bonus to shield resistances per level


• Slot layout: 6H, 7M, 5L; 0 turrets, 4 launchers
• Fittings: 8500 PWG, 715 CPU
• Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 8000 / 6100 / 7000
• Shield resists: 0% EM / 50% EX / 70% KIN / 80% THERM
• Armor resists: 50% EM / 10% EX / 62.5% KIN / 86.25% THERM
• Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap/s) : 6325 / 1150s / 5.5 cap/s
• Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 85 m/s / .12 / 114195000 / 19s
• Drones (bandwidth / bay): 25 / 50
• Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 95km / 105 / 10
• Sensor strength: 28 Gravimetric
• Signature radius: 450

And a bastion module that makes sense. Its pretty powerful, but again, its balanced against the fact that you COMMIT. No logi, can't move, can still be neuted, and anyone can run away from you.

BASTION MODULE

• Increases shield and armor repair amount by 25%
• Increases shield, armor and hull by 25%
• Extends all large turret falloff and optimal by 25%
• Increases all large missile max velocity by 25%
• Increases damage from large missiles and turrets by 25%
• When activated, the bastion module repairs the marauder for 25% of its maximum capacitor, armor, shield, and hull hp.
• Has a cycle time of 60 seconds.
• When in bastion mode, Marauder is immune to EW but cannot be remote assisted in any way
• When in bastion mode, Marauder speed is set to 0 m/s, mass is increased by a factor of 10, cannot warp. Also

When its activated, we're parked. We commit. When we turn this thing on its either win or die, so it better be worth it.

Its useful with the bastion module. Its useful without it. It has enough slots to make good fitting choices. It can be buffer tanked or active tanked. It has good application, which can be made better with TPs or webs, but it doesn't NEED to fit them.


Love it. Quoting for great justice.

Katrina Oniseki

Orakkus
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2202 - 2013-09-04 21:17:29 UTC
Going to throw a bit of a wrench in this love/hate fest, cuz it needs it.. especially since some of those posters appear to have the memory and attention span of a gnat.

First off, CCP Rise, CCP Fozzie, and CCP Ytterbium has thus far done a GREAT and UNPRECIDENTED job in rebalancing all these ships. And many of the arguments posted here are just based on "what ifs" rather than what is actually happening. This is not the CCP of old where once they changed it, years would pass before they even thought about it again. It is a NEW CCP and one I have throughly enjoyed. Have I disagreed with them? Yes I have, but it didn't take long for me to realize that while I may not like a specific change, the overall difference was impressive and well thought out.

Second, this new ship rebalancing team has never left off something when it was still broken. And by "broken" I mean the "not at all viable", not the "It doesn't work like it used to" broken. They have been quick to respond, quick to re-envision, and quick to change. Let them bring the original Marauders to the test server and see what they do, the worst thing that will happen is that a.) We'll see the new animation, and b.) they'll go back to the drawing board. The fact that they are still pondering what to do with the ships that have been the most difficult to repurpose (EAFs, Black Ops, etc) shows that they are taking this task seriously. So, let em try it.. even if it fails miserably.. it won't be there forever.

I've seen these arguments from when they re-did Tech 1 frigates (I'm a Minmatar pilot btw), Tech 2 frigates, Tech 1 destroyers, Tech 1 Industrials, Tech 1 Cruisers, Tech 1 Battleships, etc.. you all noticing a pattern? It may be different people, but dang.. just let them SHOW us what they want to do and let us play with it before we go all "burn jita" on them.

Who knows.. they may find out something even more fun to try.

He's not just famous, he's "IN" famous. - Ned Nederlander

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2203 - 2013-09-04 21:18:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyberius Franklin
Ravasta Helugo wrote:
It makes the ship 10% cheaper to gank.
Which is mostly irrelevant as that 10% is too marginal to make you a target when compared with the mods you have fit. If you weren't putting yourself at risk prior you still won't be after. Also the full 10% only plays out when firing into the resist holes for factions that do not shift those holes with their T2 resists.
Ravasta Helugo wrote:
Most of the time, you aren't. If you're Amarr, you NEVER are.
Amarr is an outlier, yes. Vargur, being applicable against any faction, can draw benefit selectively. Kronos/Golem are aligned well with their opposing factions.
Ravasta Helugo wrote:
1.45x, and it isn't worth it.
Only if you are Amarr does the 1.45x number really play out.
Ravasta Helugo wrote:
Burning to gates is a huge isk/hr concern. As much as I love them, MJD make that very difficult, even with trig.
A bit of effort can easily land you close enough to negate the loss, which is really all that matters.
maGz
Hookers and Blackjack II
#2204 - 2013-09-04 21:21:21 UTC
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
To mare wrote:
whats truly happening:
art team: "hey we made a super cool animation for marauder this will solve everything"
ytterbum: "yeah that sound cool but lets add some stats to it"
.
.
players: "oh shiny thingies that dont solve the main problems with the ship class, **** the animation give us a real boost"
.
.
.
.
.
.
ytterbum: "hey art team the players dont want to see our cool animation they rather want a real boost"
art team: "**** them we spent so much time doing this we have to use it"
ytterbum: "ok lets try to mess around with the stats again without solving the problem agaim"


You got that right except for the players' line. We were all "5k dps tank? Bring it on!"
Then CCP went "Oh crap someone made a 5k DPS tank with dual ASBs on a Vargur... better nerf the tank"

And now we're at this Frankenstein of a ship class.

CCP, rework Marauders again, keep the bastion mode, but make the bonuses work together. Don't give them two skirmish bonuses (range + MJD) and two brawler bonuses (web + immobile Bastion)


This. Figure out what you actually want with the Marauders rather than spewing out random ideas that give people the impression you don't even know your own game.

Unless ofc it is a matter of having done some fancy graphics and now you just have to figure out a way of implementing into the game. If that's the case, allow me introduce Bastion MKII: Does nothing for the ship but makes it look really cool,. which quite frankly should be more important than some weird ideas about ships being useful. All credit goes to the Art Dept. (those guys rock!).
zbaaca
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
#2205 - 2013-09-04 21:21:37 UTC
Bullet Therapist didn't fixed bonuses on his post
they should be
• Caldari Battleship Skill Bonus:
10% bonus to cruise missile and torpedo velocity
7.5% bonus to cruise missile and torpedo explosion velocity per level(instead 5%)

• Marauders Skill Bonus:
5% bonus to the cruise missile and torpedo explosion radius per level (ins. velocity)
4% bonus to shield resistances per level
and only then golem can be compared with damage application to CNR

Bugs are opportunities to cause unprecedented amounts of destruction. --Zorgn ♡♡♡

marVLs
#2206 - 2013-09-04 21:21:53 UTC  |  Edited by: marVLs
CCP have good intentions, but those changes are far from their assumptions. They want Marauders to be primary PVE kings, and add to them PVP possibility (not so important because of their price, so no mather what it will be nishe).

I see they want to buff those Marauders for that in other way than DPS increase but it's not so easy, let's see:

- in lvl4s the most important thing is DPS with not some heavy gimmick because You want to do them as fast as possible and don't frustrate
Ok we got on Marauders less ammo consumption and tractor bonus (too small, should be x3), but in reality it's not enough, no need for more tank in bastion, ewar immunity is useful in very small percentage of missions, T2 resists are bad on ship like Paladin (weakest res are most important...), bastion range mode is useless, because You will actually loose damage when standing and shooting NPC's in falloff etc instead of go close to them, only tracking bonus will be useful in some missions like Damsel. Give to that still bad scan resolution, nerf to speed and drones and no way someone will choose them instead of RNI or Pirate BS's.

- in incursions most important is DPS or EWAR, or both like on Vindi...

I like transformation concept and this second action mode but now those bonuses on Bastion are useless, with or without it Marauders are still bad compared to Pirate or Navy BS's.
That's why i insist on changing Bastion tanking bonuses to raw dps bonuses with possibility to remote reps. Here, in one change they are viable for missions, incursions (remowe web bonuses so they wont monopolize them) and PVP
Mina Sebiestar
Minmatar Inner Space Conglomerate
#2207 - 2013-09-04 21:22:44 UTC
Good job CCP

PPl will moan 4lvl4 dream tank..but this is def move in right direction.

It is still tanking monster its just not obviously over the top so.

You choke behind a smile a fake behind the fear

Because >>I is too hard

Josilin du Guesclin
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#2208 - 2013-09-04 21:26:23 UTC
M1k3y Koontz wrote:

The web bonus makes sense with the bastion mode, if that is the direction CCP is going. If they are sticking to bastion mode as is, and it seems that way, drop the range bonus for tracking and do something else with the MJD bonus.
I love the MJD bonus. It's unique, has interesting possibilities, and should be fun. Heck, MJDs are already fun, and with a much more generous cooldown they'll be great.

MBizon Osis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#2209 - 2013-09-04 21:28:51 UTC
"Order, counter-order, disorder" Napoleon

Looks like there are 2 camps here more or less.

The first one seems to be players who have trained and actively fly marauders. They have been asking for minor buffs for 5 years. But mostly want to keep the game play style more or less the same. It is a long train to fly these ships the way they want to.

The 2nd is people that like the new ideas of a micro jumpy/mini-dred and the new game play and tactics, fleet doctrine, solo, small gang, pvp and pve options it might bring.

These 2 camps will never reconcile with each other. I believe EVE is big enough for both.

Re-balance the marauders from the base in game now stats and for example: T2 resists (it is a T2 ship), more sensor strength equal to T1 BSs 21-22, and possibly more drone bandwidth & bay. Have the 4 high slots and noctis like bonuses
for them. This IMHO would not be OP and or change much just be a little better at what it already is good at. The expense alone will keep them in check.

Now the new micro jumping bastion ship at lest for the Amarr use the Abaddon model as the Amarr dred is the same art style have the animations of siege modes match would be cool. Use the 1st bastion iteration stats with what ever hull stats you care to try. Make a NEW ship for eve for a new style of play.

Win win for every body. Unless some of the fun goes away when some people are not having what they like taken away for the enjoyment of those who will probably never even train for the changes they are championing.

Cassius Invictus
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#2210 - 2013-09-04 21:33:18 UTC
Ravasta Helugo wrote:
Nam Dnilb wrote:
Ravasta Helugo wrote:
Note that EM and Thermal are remaining the exact same as current. The Kin helps slightly with Gurista. Exp helps significantly with Angels. But that's all she wrote.


Imma shootin' Guristas and Angels with mah Lazors! (said nobody, ever)

Exactly.


Yup, don't get it CCP. Thank you for acknowledging my earlier proposition but for god’s sake what is up with those resists? EM and Thermal lowest for Paladin? Explo and Kin for Vargur? That’s hilarious. Seems Kronos and Golem are fine. I know that stat line is standard for T2 Amarr and Minmatar ships, but if they are still mainly PvE ships match their strongest resists to their racial NPS rat types!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ps. Webs are useless IMHO but if so many people want them, than who am I to argue...
marVLs
#2211 - 2013-09-04 21:36:21 UTC
Bullet Therapist wrote:
I kind of feel like marauders are being pushed into so many different directions here to try to fill roles that either other ships fill better, or don't really exist in the first place. I know CCP is trying, but it all seems so screwed up right now.

Instead of concentrating so hard on making marauders wildly different from pirate battleships and other parts of the ship line-up why don't they follow the rest of the t2 lineup, and make what changes are needed to keep them on course.

For instance, to separate them from pirate battleships look at what pirate battleships do well. All of the pirate ships have great dps, most are fairly fast (with the machariel being very fast) and three of them have fantastic ewar bonuses. Why not keep this to pirate battleships? If they need to be reworked a little then do so during the pirate rebalance, but keep things like 90% webs, web range, a neuts to pirate battleships.

Whats left over now for marauders? Well why not follow the assault ship/command ship lineup. Keep the marauder's dps about the same, but emphasize their tank and application, but do so without utterly pidgeonholeing the class. Get rid of all of all of the ewar bonuses. ALL of them. No bonus to webs, none to target painters. Just drop them. If we want them, we'll fit them, just don't make us feel like we have to in order to optimize the ship. When you think about ship bonuses realize that people are going to use long and short range weapons on the ship. Keep this in mind. A web bonus is less of a help to people using long range weapons than it is to someone who uses short range ones.

Here's a sample of something that makes sense.

GOLEM

• Role Bonus: 100% bonus to cruise missile and torpedo damage. 70% reduction in Micro Jump Drive reactivation delay. Can fit Bastion modules.

• 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:
5% bonus to the cruise missile and torpedo explosion velocity per level
4% bonus to shield resistances per level


• Slot layout: 6H, 7M, 5L; 0 turrets, 4 launchers
• Fittings: 8500 PWG, 715 CPU
• Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 8000 / 6100 / 7000
• Shield resists: 0% EM / 50% EX / 70% KIN / 80% THERM
• Armor resists: 50% EM / 10% EX / 62.5% KIN / 86.25% THERM
• Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap/s) : 6325 / 1150s / 5.5 cap/s
• Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 85 m/s / .12 / 114195000 / 19s
• Drones (bandwidth / bay): 25 / 50
• Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 95km / 105 / 10
• Sensor strength: 28 Gravimetric
• Signature radius: 450

And a bastion module that makes sense. Its pretty powerful, but again, its balanced against the fact that you COMMIT. No logi, can't move, can still be neuted, and anyone can run away from you.

BASTION MODULE

• Increases shield and armor repair amount by 25%
• Increases shield, armor and hull by 25%
• Extends all large turret falloff and optimal by 25%
• Increases all large missile max velocity by 25%
• Increases damage from large missiles and turrets by 25%
• When activated, the bastion module repairs the marauder for 25% of its maximum capacitor, armor, shield, and hull hp.
• Has a cycle time of 60 seconds.
• When in bastion mode, Marauder is immune to EW but cannot be remote assisted in any way
• When in bastion mode, Marauder speed is set to 0 m/s, mass is increased by a factor of 10, cannot warp. Also

When its activated, we're parked. We commit. When we turn this thing on its either win or die, so it better be worth it.

Its useful with the bastion module. Its useful without it. It has enough slots to make good fitting choices. It can be buffer tanked or active tanked. It has good application, which can be made better with TPs or webs, but it doesn't NEED to fit them.



Sure better than CCP version but i will personally make Golem pure torpedo boat ;)
So 20% to torps (only) velocity
Second exp velo changed to exp radius
Shield res changed to something else
Cade Windstalker
#2212 - 2013-09-04 21:38:57 UTC
Rroff wrote:
I doubt it would live long against multiple dreads tbh even a single one can put hurt on it - BS sig + low speeds/stationary even with a lot of EHP will go down very fast - ignoring lock times a single decently fit moros can put over 1m points of damage on it within a minute and the alpha can be quite savage I've seen a 300k EHP raven (C5 pulsar + max siege links) vaporised by the alpha from 2 revelations.


I've also seen a Bhaalgorn tank the explosive damage from two Naglfars while neuting them out. It's all down to how much Logi you can put and keep on field. If you can keep a Golem up then your dreads are doing a lot more damage and you can buffer tank a Golem to the point that it can and will stand full alpha from a Moros with these resist changes. All you need is enough Basilisks to the shields back to full and since the repair modules cycle roughly twice for every one cycle of the Moros's guns that's not too hard.

Also keep in mind that the primary place where Dread-Blapping is a major form of warfare is Wormholes where it's hard to bring more than 3 capitals onto the field at a time.

Caleb Seremshur wrote:
Katrina Oniseki wrote:
Scrapping bastion means scrapping any work Art has already done on the transformation and remodeling. Something I seriously doubt CCP is willing to do.


its 6 months out and this is a purely theoretical module. They probably haven't even started


Actually CSM confirmed they got to see WIP transformations on three of them at the Summit.

Katrina Oniseki wrote:
One ship takes 3 months to redesign. There are four ships to do. You do the math.

CSM has seen the transformations already. That means they are already far enough into the process to show a working example. That's significant.


The ~3 months thing from the art thread was for a redesign on the level of the Bombers, this is adding animations to existing hulls as far as we know, meaning it's less of a time investment overall.

Still though, you are correct that they're a bit past the conceptual phase on Bastion transformations.
Gwen Ambraelle
Last Train From Cadspugh
#2213 - 2013-09-04 21:41:28 UTC
Ravasta Helugo wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
isn't it great that CCP don't even ask us if we would like such drastic changes they just make them Shocked

I'm going to be fair to CCP: They asked for feedback, and well over half of it was people bitching about their incursion webs and T2 Resists.

Many of us who supported the changes just tipped the hat and walked away from the thread. You can't blame them for thinking this change was going to be popular.

But seriously, CCP: The first idea was way, way better. Bring back the old Bastion.


+1 this ^
Cade Windstalker
#2214 - 2013-09-04 21:42:42 UTC
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
Derath Ellecon wrote:

So you take ships that were at least pretty good for PVE, even if they kind of stunk for PVP, and now made them so they suck for both.


Marauders are IN NO WAY being nerfed for PVE.

A loss of a tank bonus, which is gained by if you use Bastion module and then some. (also giving you EWar immunity and a range bonus) in exchange for an 82.5% web bonus sounds fair enough.


Except that the web-bonus doesn't work terribly well with Bastion and while in Bastion we're back to having to fit more resist mods to get similar effective tanking potential which removes the attractiveness of trading immobility for 30% resists and more damage applications fitting space.
hmskrecik
TransMine Group
#2215 - 2013-09-04 21:45:42 UTC  |  Edited by: hmskrecik
Cassius Invictus wrote:
Ravasta Helugo wrote:
Nam Dnilb wrote:
Ravasta Helugo wrote:
Note that EM and Thermal are remaining the exact same as current. The Kin helps slightly with Gurista. Exp helps significantly with Angels. But that's all she wrote.


Imma shootin' Guristas and Angels with mah Lazors! (said nobody, ever)

Exactly.


Yup, don't get it CCP. Thank you for acknowledging my earlier proposition but for god’s sake what is up with those resists? EM and Thermal lowest for Paladin? Explo and Kin for Vargur? That’s hilarious. Seems Kronos and Golem are fine. I know that stat line is standard for T2 Amarr and Minmatar ships, but if they are still mainly PvE ships match their strongest resists to their racial NPS rat types!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Frankly, *I* don't get it. It's like people flying Marauders had never seen other T2 ships. Whole T2 lineage has the same (ok, similar) resist characteristics and only on Marauders they are meh??? Geez...

Hint: advanced ships tank not against their mission rats, they tank against their opposing faction (Amarr tanks Minmatar and vice versa and so on).

About the updated OP, I too liked more the first version however the second one still looks good.
Battle Cube
Cube Collective
#2216 - 2013-09-04 21:47:32 UTC
Josilin du Guesclin wrote:
M1k3y Koontz wrote:

The web bonus makes sense with the bastion mode, if that is the direction CCP is going. If they are sticking to bastion mode as is, and it seems that way, drop the range bonus for tracking and do something else with the MJD bonus.
I love the MJD bonus. It's unique, has interesting possibilities, and should be fun. Heck, MJDs are already fun, and with a much more generous cooldown they'll be great.



MJD makes a lot more sense on a ship that is not this one
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#2217 - 2013-09-04 21:47:47 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Time for another update.

We discussed the Marauder situation further and came with the following changes:


  • Shield, armor and hull 30% resistance boosts have been removed on the Bastion Module - instead, all Marauders will now get proper tech2 resists. This will allow Marauders to have better RR use outside Bastion and reduce overall tanking effectiveness inside the mode.

  • We have removed all tanking bonuses on the Marauders hulls (Armor Repairer amount on the Paladin and Kronos, Shield Boost amount on the Golem and Vargur). Instead, we are giving them 7.5% bonus to the velocity factor of stasis webifiers per level. This will not only help reducing their tanking effectiveness, be more in theme with the ship role itself and help anyone using them with short range weapons. We are not giving them a full 10% per level back as this would be extremely powerful in conjunction with the other bonuses / Bastion. We are going to leave the full 10% web strength amount on the Serpentis ships for now and see how things evolve with time.

  • Also, we are removing the mass penalty on the Bastion mode. Tests have shown you can't really turn when it's active anyway, and we don't want to have players abuse that to collapse wormholes.


I will change the OP to match the changes.



0/10
Cade Windstalker
#2218 - 2013-09-04 21:50:17 UTC
Orakkus wrote:
Going to throw a bit of a wrench in this love/hate fest, cuz it needs it.. especially since some of those posters appear to have the memory and attention span of a gnat.

First off, CCP Rise, CCP Fozzie, and CCP Ytterbium has thus far done a GREAT and UNPRECIDENTED job in rebalancing all these ships. And many of the arguments posted here are just based on "what ifs" rather than what is actually happening. This is not the CCP of old where once they changed it, years would pass before they even thought about it again. It is a NEW CCP and one I have throughly enjoyed. Have I disagreed with them? Yes I have, but it didn't take long for me to realize that while I may not like a specific change, the overall difference was impressive and well thought out.

Second, this new ship rebalancing team has never left off something when it was still broken. And by "broken" I mean the "not at all viable", not the "It doesn't work like it used to" broken. They have been quick to respond, quick to re-envision, and quick to change. Let them bring the original Marauders to the test server and see what they do, the worst thing that will happen is that a.) We'll see the new animation, and b.) they'll go back to the drawing board. The fact that they are still pondering what to do with the ships that have been the most difficult to repurpose (EAFs, Black Ops, etc) shows that they are taking this task seriously. So, let em try it.. even if it fails miserably.. it won't be there forever.

I've seen these arguments from when they re-did Tech 1 frigates (I'm a Minmatar pilot btw), Tech 2 frigates, Tech 1 destroyers, Tech 1 Industrials, Tech 1 Cruisers, Tech 1 Battleships, etc.. you all noticing a pattern? It may be different people, but dang.. just let them SHOW us what they want to do and let us play with it before we go all "burn jita" on them.

Who knows.. they may find out something even more fun to try.


Quoting this because oh gods so true. Seriously people:

Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Some one slap him, he's hysterical. Its a rebalancing man, calm down


This, with a wet fish, to this entire bloody thread.

We have over four months to hack each other to pieces, lets not litter the floor with missing limbs just yet people
Ravasta Helugo
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#2219 - 2013-09-04 21:53:47 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:


Quoting this because oh gods so true. Seriously people:

Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Some one slap him, he's hysterical. Its a rebalancing man, calm down


This, with a wet fish, to this entire bloody thread.

We have over four months to hack each other to pieces, lets not litter the floor with missing limbs just yet people

Why procrastinate?
Cade Windstalker
#2220 - 2013-09-04 21:54:37 UTC
MBizon Osis wrote:
"Order, counter-order, disorder" Napoleon

Looks like there are 2 camps here more or less.

The first one seems to be players who have trained and actively fly marauders. They have been asking for minor buffs for 5 years. But mostly want to keep the game play style more or less the same. It is a long train to fly these ships the way they want to.

The 2nd is people that like the new ideas of a micro jumpy/mini-dred and the new game play and tactics, fleet doctrine, solo, small gang, pvp and pve options it might bring.

These 2 camps will never reconcile with each other. I believe EVE is big enough for both.

Re-balance the marauders from the base in game now stats and for example: T2 resists (it is a T2 ship), more sensor strength equal to T1 BSs 21-22, and possibly more drone bandwidth & bay. Have the 4 high slots and noctis like bonuses
for them. This IMHO would not be OP and or change much just be a little better at what it already is good at. The expense alone will keep them in check.

Now the new micro jumping bastion ship at lest for the Amarr use the Abaddon model as the Amarr dred is the same art style have the animations of siege modes match would be cool. Use the 1st bastion iteration stats with what ever hull stats you care to try. Make a NEW ship for eve for a new style of play.

Win win for every body. Unless some of the fun goes away when some people are not having what they like taken away for the enjoyment of those who will probably never even train for the changes they are championing.



You're missing the third camp that want PvP monstrosities for small gang/solo work and are pushing for that. Those would be the ones primarily yelling for the web bonus and full T2 resists.