Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Since I still didn't got a answer on it, is it really to much to ask for keeping the current marauders ingame as 2. marauder ship? Outside of bastion, what is not useful in hulls you want to move a lot or while relaying on remote repair, the new ones are worse for most applications and the changes make the hulls pointless in nearly every of the old niches where they where competitive or slightly better than faction BS.

Obviously not. It just brings too many strings attached. Same bonuses on both ship types. Same models. Pretty similar role (just different approach to it).

Fixing any or all of it in any extent requires heaps of human-butt-hours of office work. Expansion is due in 10 days. Sadly that won't happen. As anything else that is truly in need of change:

1. Tractor bonuses (just add 5th and 6th bonuses to ship for each level of Adv. Ship command (or that High Energy Physics or whatever that skill is for Bastion, would be good for RP/Lore) and move tractor speed and range in it from role bonus +30-50% per level: to 150-250% at 5th - better then current and not OP, as well as Jump drive reactivation delay -12-15% per level: will be -60-75% at 5th lvl pretty close to original).

2. Vargur did got the short end of stick in this update (discussed in hundreds of posts).

3. Paladin optimal is too high in B-mode, it's simply not needed - change to tracking.

well and heaps of other small things.

Playing with EFT settings its telling me my Rubicon T2 Tach Paladin in Bastion Mode (1x TC) gets me 233KM Optimal and 40km Falloff with Aurora. I would agree that is obscene range not many people will use / need. It would take almost 3 minutes and 3 MJD jumps to put me that far out from a static target. Tracking would be MUCH better and would be much needed.

Everyone seems to forget about the most substantial buff of them all.

E-WAR IMMUNITY!!!!


You can sit there and poke at it all you want, but this buff alone leads to twice the effectiveness of these ships compared to what's on TQ.

No more issues with damps, jams, or tracking dis.

And if you say those were never that big of an issue you're full of sh!t.

i've flown both Gallente and Caldari missions against serps and guristas...

It is damn near impossible to perform in these missions with a marauder, expecially when you consider jams against their existing scan res on TQ.

Even if you do get a targetting window through jams, it takes too long to target the jamming ships and you're lucky if you get a volley off.

You may say that you never see enough jam/damp/tracking dis missions for it to make a difference, but I disagree, as their are agents out there that I have flown for where a minimum of 50% of the missions given to me had some form of ewar the was detrimental to marauders.

When I fly my nightmare I never use anything with greater range on my t2 tachs than navy infrared.

With the Pali range, I would say you should never need anything more than maybe navy standard at max targetting range.


However, I will say that Marauders at least have the capability to bombard high sec POSes at long range, though the Golem is the best suited for it.


I suppose that maybe each of these ships has a niche situation where it is better than another ship.

Golem - POS bashing
Paladin - Counter sniper
Vargur - CQB - I.E., fit ACs and burn close range targets
Kronos - Kinda the all around ship... The jack of all trades.

It seems fairly clear that the speed reductions all but limits the Marauders to a long-range role. To make them slightly more useful in short-range rolls, I would suggest the following:

• Increase the base speed of the Kronos to 115 m/sec (-5) and the Vargur to 120 m/sec (-10).
• Replace the Golem's Marauder TP bonus with a 5% rate of fire bonus (in-line with the T1 Raven bonuses)
• Replace the Vargur's Marauder tracking bonus with a 5% damage bonus (in-line with the T1 Tempest bonuses).

If Marauders are all about projection and not damage application, why is the Paladin the only one that doesn't have an application bonus?

Kronos: Tracking
Vargur: Tracking
Golem: Target Painter

No , i am not being a drama queen, You on other hand are being a B#@!#!@#!. Everyone with half a brain understood what I meant in the context. You are not trying to have an argumentation, you are just trying to stomp your feet and nitpick ion irrelevant non arguments.

Stop that. NO ONE CARES FOR PEOPLE THAT ACT LIKE THAT!

It does not matter that my freighter suddenly got improved sensor strenght. That is NOT a buff!!!!! Same thing for the unusable changes on the vargur.

No, range bonuses are not application bonuses. They are projection bonuses. Application bonuses are things like tracking, web bonuses, bonuses to target painters, increases to explosion velocity and decreases to explosion radius. Anything that lets you apply your damage more effectively to things that are already in your current range are application bonuses.

Projection bonuses are things like optimal, falloff, increased missile velocity or longer missile flight time. Anything that lets your weapons reach further than they already do is a projection bonus. Also, if a range bonus is so powerful then it clearly belongs on a pirate ship that's geared toward all-out power and not on a Marauder that isn't - right?

With regards to "stepping on the Nightmare's toes", that's kind of invalid for two reasons; the first reason being that the other two turret Marauders already step on the toes of their respective pirate battleships and the second reason being that pirate ships haven't been rebalanced yet - this means that they can (and very well may) see modified or entirely different bonuses compared to what they have now.

And so for once I thought that maybe this time that kind of discussion would go a little bit further... I stated very clearly that I don't request very hard data, no proper averages and so on. Some out of blue but comparable numbers would do.

Why I insist on this? Look at it from my perspective. I have run those tests I asked you for and I got my own results and then you, or other persons, come and say that according to your theoretical analysis you come to different conclusions, which totally contradict what I've already seen on my own eyes. Can you blame me that I smell bullshit? Not because you say it, you don't, but there's definitely something amiss.

And frankly, I don't even expect from you that you run some particular test just for my sake. If you run missions you must somehow measure what performance you're getting, otherwise why bother optimizing? Thus you must have somehow come to the conclusion that SiSi Vargur was badly nerfed. And if this was based on some practical observations, this is the data I asked for.

Look at Dinsdale. With all his hysteric paranoia (or paranoic hysteria) he did the right thing. When new marauders hit SiSi he gathered bunch of people and run some incursions. This of course confirmed his initial asessment and we can talk that he was biased or if I was expert in running this stuff we could go into discussion whether each of us was doing things right or wrong or if we utilised our gear properly but one thing remains: he did test. And just for that he has my respect.

Funny you mentioned power creep, because I think that currently ships are pretty well balanced. If you are in situations where you need and can get away with having only dps then you want to fly pirate battleships. If you need more tank or flexibility (or mobility on field) then marauders are way to go. If marauders were made as powerful as most people here wanted them to, there would be zero reason to use other ships, except for not having necessary skills trained yet. And that would be power creep.

Sorry for not commenting the rest your comments. Like I mentioned earlier, I'm tired of discussing stats. To me performance is what matters and is my ultimate goal. If I pimp my ship or use an implant it's not for warm and fuzzy feeling of having cold and sharp piece of electronics plugged into my head. It's for the warm and fuzzy feeling of having bigger ticks or shorter mission time (on the other hand I'm a bit relaxed regarding total outcome, but it's a different story) and they, or other metrics, are the only criteria by which I evaluate if I'm having improvement and if it's significant.