These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Ran an NMC with 3 Marauders tonight

Author
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#1 - 2013-10-09 04:28:03 UTC
We were just messing around, getting ships ready for serious testing, and it kind of evolved.

Bottom line, 2 Paladin's and a Vargur, switched later to a Kronos, with no booster, ran an NMC.
One of the guys had run the NMC solo earlier in the day.

No ships were lost, which is good.
Naturally, with 3 ships, no real hard data can be gleaned on the efficiency of running the new version Marauders , but it is very very clear that they are really hammered with the loss of the webifier bonus. I need 10 Marauders in a VG to get a better handle on this.

A lot more testing is required, but gut feeling is that Marauders are heavily nerfed in VG's with these changes. And that does not even begin to factor in the huge nerf to ISK because of the massive increase moving from site to site.

Will add to the thread, or create a new one, as more testing is done.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#2 - 2013-10-09 05:03:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Alvatore DiMarco
Do TQ Incursion fleets consist solely of Marauders? Or do they also include other ships that didn't lose their web bonus?

EDIT: In addition, specifically how does the loss of web bonuses negatively affect the ships? If it's because your long-range weapons cannot track, then try fitting short-range weapons instead.
suid0
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#3 - 2013-10-09 08:39:11 UTC
Yeah, some context into how you ran the site would be helpful.

Did you just enter sit still and shoot, or did you enter, MJD away and shoot things as they burn at you?

the entire enemy support fleet is dead except for one interdictor a titan could easily finish off with drones  - Commander Ted

Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#4 - 2013-10-09 12:22:03 UTC
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
Do TQ Incursion fleets consist solely of Marauders? Or do they also include other ships that didn't lose their web bonus?

EDIT: In addition, specifically how does the loss of web bonuses negatively affect the ships? If it's because your long-range weapons cannot track, then try fitting short-range weapons instead.


I was using pulses, with a TC with tracking speed. Hitting close in frigs was impossible with the guns, and the NPC's started eating my drones because my guns were doing less damage than the frigs. The guys who MJD'ed away from me were doing better because the frigs were then 90-100 km from me. But Beams do less damage than Pulses.

And the only other armour ship with a bonus that can be used without sacrificing huge effective DPS is the Vindicator, and CCP has already stated that the Vindi is on the chopping block.

Testing with 3 ships is just not good enough. We need minimum of 10.
Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#5 - 2013-10-09 12:38:37 UTC
So instead of using MJD which is greatly bonused on new Marauders and get range you just sit in one place and let frigs go under your guns? Yeah, it is CCP's fault for sure...

Invalid signature format

Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#6 - 2013-10-09 12:47:28 UTC
Don't incursion fleets typically feature T3s as well who are able to handle frigs with their smaller guns?
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#7 - 2013-10-09 12:47:33 UTC
Schmata Bastanold wrote:
So instead of using MJD which is greatly bonused on new Marauders and get range you just sit in one place and let frigs go under your guns? Yeah, it is CCP's fault for sure...


Sigh......and Scorch does how much damage compared to Imp Navy Multi-freq?
Last night was merely a hastily thrown together proof of concept.

There were no boosters, the bar was essentially red, we had 3 ships.
It was very very far from a complete test.

This entire thread was designed to give people a heads up that testing is going on, and try to encourage people to get involved in it. I should have realized that trolls like you would step up.

So unless you plan on getting onto Sisi to help out, well, shut up.
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#8 - 2013-10-09 12:58:47 UTC
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
Don't incursion fleets typically feature T3s as well who are able to handle frigs with their smaller guns?


The fleets I am involved with on TQ use 9 Paladins and 2 Oni's under optimal conditions, and blow away any fleets that use Loki's as webbers. After much refinement, it is the most efficient armour fleet out there, on TQ.

Remember, those 9 Paladins on TQ are running 18 bonused webs.
So the testing is trying to see if Marauders are still viable in Incursions, or are they outclassed by other ships now.

From a solo tanking perspective, yeah, I am convinced they can tank a VG, but at what cost to effective DPS?
Just because they can tank a VG does not mean the ship is any good in a VG anymore.

That is the part that needs to be tested, and 3 ships running around in an NMC is clearly not going to answer that.
A full complement of Marauders are needed, and then site times have to be compared to existing site times on TQ.

Bottom line, if a full Marauder fleet can't maintain times under 5:30, payout to payout (and yes, I run in a group that does better than that now, but every BS is now warping minimum of 20 seconds more between sites on Sisi), then Marauder are no longer a viable ship for incursions as people will migrate to the fastest ship / doctrine.

As for L4's, I have not tested them yet. I am sure they will work, but are they faster than the current Marauder, or pirate BS?
Jasmine Assasin
The Holy Rollers
#9 - 2013-10-09 13:27:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Jasmine Assasin
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
Don't incursion fleets typically feature T3s as well who are able to handle frigs with their smaller guns?


I don't know about the armor fleets but we use Vindicators. Shiney invul, SeBo, triple webs. And it's not uncommon for them to get 1800+ DPS either. Know a couple deep into the 2k range. Far far better than any T3 could ever hope to achieve. For stuff at range this is Tachmare/Mach territory. Mids filled with tracking comps, SeBos (to lock stuff before it even starts moving) and then just insta-pop everything possible. Once stuff gets into Vindi range we are already aligning to the next site...
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#10 - 2013-10-09 13:57:21 UTC
Jasmine Assasin wrote:
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
Don't incursion fleets typically feature T3s as well who are able to handle frigs with their smaller guns?


I don't know about the armor fleets but we use Vindicators. Shiney invul, SeBo, triple webs. And it's not uncommon for them to get 1800+ DPS either. Know a couple deep into the 2k range. Far far better than any T3 could ever hope to achieve. For stuff at range this is Tachmare/Mach territory. Mids filled with tracking comps, SeBos (to lock stuff before it even starts moving) and then just insta-pop everything possible. Once stuff gets into Vindi range we are already aligning to the next site...


Yeah, shields run a very tight doctrine, much tighter than armour, and shields don't use Marauders.
Armour incursions run a more relaxed group, but the 9 Paladin/ 2 Oni set up is pretty much superior to any other armour setup in VG's.

So the ultimate question for me is: are Marauders going to be as good as they were in Armour Incursions?
That is why I want to do a ton of testing, and present as much feedback as possible to CCP.

Will they listen? Their track record when it comes to wrecking PvE income is pretty awful.
But I do know that they are listening to what people say about Marauders, because clearly, they don't know what to do with them.
Darkwolf
#11 - 2013-10-09 23:10:48 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
So the testing is trying to see if Marauders are still viable in Incursions, or are they outclassed by other ships now.


No. What you are testing is whether Paladins can still fit into your incredibly narrow, ultra-specialized doctrine without you needing to adjust how you do things.

They won't. You're gonna have to adapt.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#12 - 2013-10-09 23:27:11 UTC
Darkwolf wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
So the testing is trying to see if Marauders are still viable in Incursions, or are they outclassed by other ships now.


No. What you are testing is whether Paladins can still fit into your incredibly narrow, ultra-specialized doctrine without you needing to adjust how you do things.

They won't. You're gonna have to adapt.


This. Absolutely.
Mocam
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#13 - 2013-10-10 02:10:54 UTC
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
Darkwolf wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
So the testing is trying to see if Marauders are still viable in Incursions, or are they outclassed by other ships now.


No. What you are testing is whether Paladins can still fit into your incredibly narrow, ultra-specialized doctrine without you needing to adjust how you do things.

They won't. You're gonna have to adapt.


This. Absolutely.


His testing is real - your statements are gimp replies to testing. "Adapt" works but if adapt is to dump an "improved" hull, it had best find uses in other areas.

Currently this hull isn't used for group activities much. As such, the loss in 1 area of "group activity" does need offsets in other areas - we aren't seeing the change-over, just a loss point -- so far.

Lots of wait and see still but don't dismiss the removal of a hull from use without some other uses gaining and the gains aren't showing yet. Again - yet. If they don't show then there is an actual issue. If they do show - ok, so it won't be used for incursions anymore - but *WILL* be used in other gang activity.

Enhancing solo play can have value but not when it is by removing the group use of a ship without a clear path for other group use.
Corvald Tyrska
Valknetra
#14 - 2013-10-11 06:11:47 UTC
Mocam wrote:
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
Darkwolf wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
So the testing is trying to see if Marauders are still viable in Incursions, or are they outclassed by other ships now.


No. What you are testing is whether Paladins can still fit into your incredibly narrow, ultra-specialized doctrine without you needing to adjust how you do things.

They won't. You're gonna have to adapt.


This. Absolutely.


His testing is real - your statements are gimp replies to testing. "Adapt" works but if adapt is to dump an "improved" hull, it had best find uses in other areas.

Currently this hull isn't used for group activities much. As such, the loss in 1 area of "group activity" does need offsets in other areas - we aren't seeing the change-over, just a loss point -- so far.

Lots of wait and see still but don't dismiss the removal of a hull from use without some other uses gaining and the gains aren't showing yet. Again - yet. If they don't show then there is an actual issue. If they do show - ok, so it won't be used for incursions anymore - but *WILL* be used in other gang activity.

Enhancing solo play can have value but not when it is by removing the group use of a ship without a clear path for other group use.


But the testing is based around whether or not a particular ship is still the absolute best efficiency for isk vs time in a specific set of circumstances. Frankly I suspect that is one of the last things CCP would be interested in balancing a ship towards given the ease of isk farming around EVE and balancing of sinks and faucets they already have to do.

Unless I have completely misread this thread he is not say that Paladins cannot do incursions, simply that when min/maxing efficiency there may now be better choices. So what? If your niche is min/maxed efficiency of isk farming then do not expect CCP to be balancing the game around you. There has been plenty of feedback on Marauders so far and much of it is positive. I would expect further balance changes around whether or not the ship is viable at all for tasks, not how well it performs in a specialized farming niche.
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#15 - 2013-10-11 12:40:55 UTC
Corvald Tyrska wrote:
Mocam wrote:
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
Darkwolf wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
So the testing is trying to see if Marauders are still viable in Incursions, or are they outclassed by other ships now.


No. What you are testing is whether Paladins can still fit into your incredibly narrow, ultra-specialized doctrine without you needing to adjust how you do things.

They won't. You're gonna have to adapt.


This. Absolutely.


His testing is real - your statements are gimp replies to testing. "Adapt" works but if adapt is to dump an "improved" hull, it had best find uses in other areas.

Currently this hull isn't used for group activities much. As such, the loss in 1 area of "group activity" does need offsets in other areas - we aren't seeing the change-over, just a loss point -- so far.

Lots of wait and see still but don't dismiss the removal of a hull from use without some other uses gaining and the gains aren't showing yet. Again - yet. If they don't show then there is an actual issue. If they do show - ok, so it won't be used for incursions anymore - but *WILL* be used in other gang activity.

Enhancing solo play can have value but not when it is by removing the group use of a ship without a clear path for other group use.


But the testing is based around whether or not a particular ship is still the absolute best efficiency for isk vs time in a specific set of circumstances. Frankly I suspect that is one of the last things CCP would be interested in balancing a ship towards given the ease of isk farming around EVE and balancing of sinks and faucets they already have to do.

Unless I have completely misread this thread he is not say that Paladins cannot do incursions, simply that when min/maxing efficiency there may now be better choices. So what? If your niche is min/maxed efficiency of isk farming then do not expect CCP to be balancing the game around you. There has been plenty of feedback on Marauders so far and much of it is positive. I would expect further balance changes around whether or not the ship is viable at all for tasks, not how well it performs in a specialized farming niche.


A reasonable enough point, except for a couple things:

1. Few people use Paladin's outside of Incursions for PvE today . Yes, or course, the current models have a "niche" in grinding ISK (they do wonders against laser NPC's). But there are other hulls that are currently more efficient, and with the proposed nerf to the ship, will continue to.

2. I would love to see what percentage of people use this current model in PvP. I mean, c'mon we know that virtually no one does. And you know what, no one will still, after this thing has been messed with. How many people are going to throw around a 1 billion ISK sub cap hull, that in its "best" mode, if completely immobile for 1 minute? You want to talk about a "niche" boat? How about "niche" PvP, where is it good at docking games, and that is about it. (Don't talk to me about roving gangs of sniper Paladin's, especially after the speed nerf. It took me 28 minutes to manually warp 16 jumps on Sisi last night, sitting at the computer.)

The Marauder was a PvE ship, and should remain a PvE ship. Contrary to what the dev's wrecking this ship think, there should be ships that are PvE boats. Without people grinding ISK, the economy and the game grinds to a halt.

Of course, unless, their plan to nerf the overall PvE income streams in the game is their plan all along.
The Spod
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#16 - 2013-10-11 13:25:51 UTC
Not seeing terrible problems with incursion marauders due to contestation mechanics. Good to test, though!

• nullsec marauders will be terrifying but run the risk of new fast tackle
• wh marauders print isk but run the risk of surprise pvp
• L4 marauders are good and run the least risk, L4 needs a bit of need in raw isk side (lp is cool)
• incursion marauders are hit by contesting

Overall the risk/reward is fine except for L4 and the issue is just in the missions, not marauders