These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

Marauder Interdiction Nullifier
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
James Zimmer
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#1 - 2015-05-24 16:44:38 UTC
I want a marauder. I want a Vargur specifically. I want to be able to run high level DED complexes like a god of PvE, and I'm willing to train for the better part of a year, and invest a couple billion ISK to do it, but I can't. The first substantial gate camp I run into, and my Vargur is dead. I guess I'll start training for a Tengu or a Loki instead, or I'll just stick to my wormholes.

Marauders were designed to be kings of PvE, but they yield that to strategic cruisers because strategic cruisers can reliably travel in hostile null, where marauders cannot. I would like to see an interdiction nullifier high-slot module for Marauders. Bastion shouldn't work when it's onlined to balance it, and make Marauder-ganking possible. Fleet doctrines shouldn't be substatially impacted by it because Marauders were (wisely) pre-nerfed to make them terrible fleet ships.
Kashadin
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#2 - 2015-05-24 16:47:55 UTC
Scouts are your friend.
Christopher Mabata
Northern Accounts and Systems
#3 - 2015-05-24 17:03:14 UTC
Marauders dont need warp interdiction [immunity], plenty of people use them in null already and don't hear them complaining.
And that is because they do what is required in Null and Low Sec, they use scouts and intel channels, carriers and jump freighters to move short distances past camps. Some of them even use Jump[ bridges and titans to get around.

Im not saying you need a titan or your own sov by any means, what i am saying is there are plenty of ways to avoid camps and get big ships into null and low sec as is. We already have enough warp interdiction immunized ships, marauders dont need to be the next one, and under NO circumstances should they be.

♣ Small Gang PVP, Large Fleet PVP, Black Ops, Incursions, Trade, and Industry ♣ 70% Lethal / 30% Super-Snuggly / 110% No idea what im doing ♣

This Message Brought to you by a sweet and sour bittervet
James Zimmer
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#4 - 2015-05-24 17:08:35 UTC
Kashadin wrote:
Scouts are your friend.


In that case, we should get rid of interdiction nullifiers on strategic cruisers too and make site running strictly a social, or dual-boxed, affair. However, I think that would be bad for the game. Braving null solo to find riches is thrilling, and I think that making a ship designed specifically for that purpose viable could only make the game better.
Hopelesshobo
Hoboland
#5 - 2015-05-24 17:10:31 UTC
James Zimmer wrote:
Bastion shouldn't work when it's onlined to balance it


Would this even be a balance point because you cant warp anyways when bastion is active and you dont get the benefits of bastion without it being online.

A better balance point for your suggestion would be to create a new module tha doesnt have near the bastion strength qualities of bastion, but makes the marauder nullified.

With this said the only thing being nullified does is to allow you to warp out of bubbles. The issue with this is that Marauders, unlike Strat Cruisers, can fit MJDs. So really the only thing your suggestion changes is you get to counter bubbles with a highslot instead of a midslot.

TLDR: Not needed, -1

Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012.
HiddenPorpoise
Jarlhettur's Drop
United Federation of Conifers
#6 - 2015-05-24 17:12:24 UTC
You have a MJD bonus; that is your nullifier.
Christopher Mabata
Northern Accounts and Systems
#7 - 2015-05-24 17:12:40 UTC
James Zimmer wrote:
Kashadin wrote:
Scouts are your friend.


In that case, we should get rid of interdiction nullifiers on strategic cruisers too and make site running strictly a social, or dual-boxed, affair. However, I think that would be bad for the game. Braving null solo to find riches is thrilling, and I think that making a ship designed specifically for that purpose viable could only make the game better.



T3's were designed to have interdiction immunity to make them unique, other ships picked up the trait because it suited their hulls nicely such as interceptors for moving around and tackling more effectively.

Marauders however are not the end all PVE ship you seem to view them as, yes they are incredibly effective, yes they boast massive local tanks and firepower, but there role is NOT just PVE, people PVP in them too, ive even met some pilots who solo PVP in them.

Nothing about what a marauder does says "Needs Interdiction immunity" and like i said before we have enough ships that cant be bubbled as is, that does Not mean give a free pass to everyone to bypass bubbles and therefore devalue bubbles and interdictors as a whole.

♣ Small Gang PVP, Large Fleet PVP, Black Ops, Incursions, Trade, and Industry ♣ 70% Lethal / 30% Super-Snuggly / 110% No idea what im doing ♣

This Message Brought to you by a sweet and sour bittervet
James Zimmer
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#8 - 2015-05-24 17:18:36 UTC  |  Edited by: James Zimmer
Hopelesshobo wrote:
James Zimmer wrote:
Bastion shouldn't work when it's onlined to balance it


Would this even be a balance point because you cant warp anyways when bastion is active and you dont get the benefits of bastion without it being online.

A better balance point for your suggestion would be to create a new module tha doesnt have near the bastion strength qualities of bastion, but makes the marauder nullified.

With this said the only thing being nullified does is to allow you to warp out of bubbles. The issue with this is that Marauders, unlike Strat Cruisers, can fit MJDs. So really the only thing your suggestion changes is you get to counter bubbles with a highslot instead of a midslot.

TLDR: Not needed, -1


First, I meant that you would have to travel fit your Marauder and wouldn't be able to instantly commit to a fight while traveling, or instantly flee if someone enters your site.

Second, 16 seconds of spooling up (or whatever it is) and hoping you don't get scrammed is hardly a viable way to move a billion ISK ship, which is probably why you see strat cruisers running sites rather than marauders better than 9 times out of 10.
Kashadin
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#9 - 2015-05-24 17:29:37 UTC
And a nullified T3 takes a fitting hit to have that sub attached. Which they need to swap out to run 9or10/10s.

Anything travel fit isn't going to be able to do the higher rated DED sties.
HiddenPorpoise
Jarlhettur's Drop
United Federation of Conifers
#10 - 2015-05-24 17:30:20 UTC
James Zimmer wrote:
Second, 16 seconds of spooling up (or whatever it is) and hoping you don't get scrammed is hardly a viable way to move a billion ISK ship.
You jump faster than you can align in a marauder. It's 9 to spool.

You know what's the wrong thing to do in a billion isk ship? Travel alone in unscouted, unprotected space.
Nasar Vyron
S0utherN Comfort
#11 - 2015-05-24 17:34:35 UTC
James Zimmer wrote:
Kashadin wrote:
Scouts are your friend.


In that case, we should get rid of interdiction nullifiers on strategic cruisers too and make site running strictly a social, or dual-boxed, affair. However, I think that would be bad for the game. Braving null solo to find riches is thrilling, and I think that making a ship designed specifically for that purpose viable could only make the game better.



Wouldn't really be "braving null" if you knew you were safe would it? Otherwise it would be no more "thrilling" than jumping into a new system.
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#12 - 2015-05-24 18:01:55 UTC
James Zimmer wrote:
Kashadin wrote:
Scouts are your friend.


In that case, we should get rid of interdiction nullifiers on strategic cruisers too and make site running strictly a social, or dual-boxed, affair. However, I think that would be bad for the game. Braving null solo to find riches is thrilling, and I think that making a ship designed specifically for that purpose viable could only make the game better.

then what would i scout with.

Murderers of Negotiable Motivations

=]|[=
EVE-Lotteries
EVE-Lotteries Corporation
#13 - 2015-05-24 18:07:43 UTC
Fit it PVP then when you are in your pve zone, launch a mobile depot and refit...

You miss blink ? Come and play with us at EVE-Lotteries.com !
James Zimmer
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#14 - 2015-05-24 18:09:41 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
James Zimmer wrote:
Kashadin wrote:
Scouts are your friend.


In that case, we should get rid of interdiction nullifiers on strategic cruisers too and make site running strictly a social, or dual-boxed, affair. However, I think that would be bad for the game. Braving null solo to find riches is thrilling, and I think that making a ship designed specifically for that purpose viable could only make the game better.

then what would i scout with.


Hahaha! An interceptor.
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#15 - 2015-05-24 18:12:53 UTC
James Zimmer wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
James Zimmer wrote:
Kashadin wrote:
Scouts are your friend.


In that case, we should get rid of interdiction nullifiers on strategic cruisers too and make site running strictly a social, or dual-boxed, affair. However, I think that would be bad for the game. Braving null solo to find riches is thrilling, and I think that making a ship designed specifically for that purpose viable could only make the game better.

then what would i scout with.


Hahaha! An interceptor.

eew no.
ill take my cloaky boosteing scanner t3 thanks very much

Murderers of Negotiable Motivations

=]|[=
Iain Cariaba
#16 - 2015-05-24 18:32:30 UTC
James Zimmer wrote:
Hopelesshobo wrote:
James Zimmer wrote:
Bastion shouldn't work when it's onlined to balance it


Would this even be a balance point because you cant warp anyways when bastion is active and you dont get the benefits of bastion without it being online.

A better balance point for your suggestion would be to create a new module tha doesnt have near the bastion strength qualities of bastion, but makes the marauder nullified.

With this said the only thing being nullified does is to allow you to warp out of bubbles. The issue with this is that Marauders, unlike Strat Cruisers, can fit MJDs. So really the only thing your suggestion changes is you get to counter bubbles with a highslot instead of a midslot.

TLDR: Not needed, -1


First, I meant that you would have to travel fit your Marauder and wouldn't be able to instantly commit to a fight while traveling, or instantly flee if someone enters your site.

Second, 16 seconds of spooling up (or whatever it is) and hoping you don't get scrammed is hardly a viable way to move a billion ISK ship, which is probably why you see strat cruisers running sites rather than marauders better than 9 times out of 10.

You really should learn how a hull works before you try to change it.

If you want to fly in hostile space, without a scout, in a billion isk ship, get a t3. A t3 capable of running 10/10s is going to cost you just as much as a Marauder capable of doing the same site.

If, however, you want to fly smart. Get yourself a scout and you can fly anything you have anywhere you want. I don't even fly my cloaky nullified t3 around lowsec without a scout.
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#17 - 2015-05-24 18:45:35 UTC
Marauders don't need nullification. Even with nullification, you would still get caught by any competent gate camp. Use a scout.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

James Zimmer
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#18 - 2015-05-24 19:33:33 UTC
Iain Cariaba wrote:


If you want to fly in hostile space, without a scout, in a billion isk ship, get a t3. A t3 capable of running 10/10s is going to cost you just as much as a Marauder capable of doing the same site.

If, however, you want to fly smart. Get yourself a scout and you can fly anything you have anywhere you want. I don't even fly my cloaky nullified t3 around lowsec without a scout.


First, what if I don't want to fly a Ten.... cough... T3? Would 4 more viable options break the game in any way, shape or form? Would adding vitality and life to the vast, unoccupied, rarely visited sections of null be such a horrible thing?

Second, I will fly anywhere BUT null in almost any ship, solo, with no scouts. It's a vastly more entertaining way to play. I can certainly get caught, and sometimes do, but I have plenty of defenses, and the chances aren't that great.

Null is generally a wasteland. The mechanics reward extreme isolation and gate camping, which cuts down on economic activity and therefore occupancy and PvP. Despite the vast resources CCP has dumped into null, most of it goes untouched. Fozzie sov will help, but sov mechanics alone will not kick start the null economy. A number of changes need to happen: Empire space needs to be more dependent on null materials, and travel needs to be easier. Inevitably, one way or another, that will mean bubbles getting weaker. Why not start the process now with select, unlikely to be abused, ships? The fact that diving into a C6, with no idea how to get out, is often considered to be much wiser than traveling in null, and that CCP is developing a 4th way to travel through null (player built gates. The other three are normal gates, cynos and wormholes) should tell you something about the health of null travel.

That being said, gate camps are fun to crack or bomb.
Iain Cariaba
#19 - 2015-05-24 19:48:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Iain Cariaba
James Zimmer wrote:
Iain Cariaba wrote:


If you want to fly in hostile space, without a scout, in a billion isk ship, get a t3. A t3 capable of running 10/10s is going to cost you just as much as a Marauder capable of doing the same site.

If, however, you want to fly smart. Get yourself a scout and you can fly anything you have anywhere you want. I don't even fly my cloaky nullified t3 around lowsec without a scout.


First, what if I don't want to fly a Ten.... cough... T3? Would 4 more viable options break the game in any way, shape or form? Would adding vitality and life to the vast, unoccupied, rarely visited sections of null be such a horrible thing?

Second, I will fly anywhere BUT null in almost any ship, solo, with no scouts. It's a vastly more entertaining way to play. I can certainly get caught, and sometimes do, but I have plenty of defenses, and the chances aren't that great.

Null is generally a wasteland. The mechanics reward extreme isolation and gate camping, which cuts down on economic activity and therefore occupancy and PvP. Despite the vast resources CCP has dumped into null, most of it goes untouched. Fozzie sov will help, but sov mechanics alone will not kick start the null economy. A number of changes need to happen: Empire space needs to be more dependent on null materials, and travel needs to be easier. Inevitably, one way or another, that will mean bubbles getting weaker. Why not start the process now with select, unlikely to be abused, ships? The fact that diving into a C6, with no idea how to get out, is often considered to be much wiser than traveling in null, and that CCP is developing a 4th way to travel through null (player built gates. The other three are normal gates, cynos and wormholes) should tell you something about the health of null travel.

That being said, gate camps are fun to crack or bomb.

If you think nullsec is so bad, stay out. We won't miss you.

If you do want to come into nullsec, then bring whatever you want. We'll just blow it up anyway.

If you don't want to fly a Tengu, then don't. However, don't try to change a working hull into something broken simply because you don't know how to fly it.
Valkin Mordirc
#20 - 2015-05-24 19:58:43 UTC
No.


Marauders are already pretty well balanced. Giving them Interdiction Nulli would be, frankly, absolutely stupid. 
#DeleteTheWeak
123Next pageLast page