These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Marauders: Underwhelming. Fix Ideas

Author
Wolodymyr
Breaking Ambitions
#21 - 2012-02-01 20:05:34 UTC
m3talc0re X wrote:
HELL no to 8 turret (or missile) points. Using half the ammo of other ships is one of the few good things left about marauders and you want to change that? Seriously?

Well if you really want to keep the old damage you are welcome to only fit 4 guns on your marauder.

But given the chance I'd love to combine the marauder's double damage bonus with 8 turrets

I honestly think PoCo based sov is a good idea https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1417544

m3talc0re X
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#22 - 2012-02-01 21:14:07 UTC
I don't think that's what he meant. I'm thinking he meant remove that 100% bonus and give it something like a 5% per level bonus or something and have 8 guns fit. They need to leave it at 4 weapon hardpoints and give it like a 120% damage bonus or 100%+a per level bonus. But base it on the battleship, not marauder. The only thing that should be based on Marauders skill level is maybe tanking bonuses.

As for Marauders vs Faction:
Lets look at the problems and arguments...

Resists. Most people say Marauders need a resist boost, I would have to disagree. They do get a little bit better resists (in their race's respective resist types), but not as much as smaller t2 ships. The marauders get a lot more buffer though. The only thing that does kinda suck it makes them a bit harder to omni-tank. If anything, give them a bit more resists across the board. Like the Kronos's massive explosive hole.

Damage. Even with Marauders 5, they're still hard pressed to get the same theoretical dps as faction ships. They don't need a huge buff, just a small one to bring them up to par with faction ships. Without Marauders 5. Having that at 5 should tip the scale and put them a little more powerful than faction. The other problem with this is faction battleships get bonuses that help them apply dps like the marauders. Vindi gets webs, Nightmare gets tracking bonus (which the Paladin simply can't match). The Vargur vs Macharial is fairly well done, imo. I don't see any problems here really. Golem vs CNR... I'm not really sure honestly. I haven't flown a Golem. I would use cruise missiles simply because of the range of torps. It does get a bit less damage than the cnr, but it also gets a couple bonuses to help it apply damage much better than a cnr, so I think it would get the same or better hits than a cnr. I'm not talking eft damage, I'm talking about real in game damage.

Price. They're about the same. There is no reason a marauder should be getting less DPS as a whole.

Sensor Strength/Scan Res. There is no damn reason this should be so gimped. The ONLY advantage a marauder would have over a faction battleship is the 3 free high slots. The argument is to keep marauders out of PvP. But what's the point? Even with the three spare highs, they are not going to be one stop killing machines. This may have made since when they were introduced, but it doesn't now. With faction ships becoming more and more common, this point is now moot and needs removed.
Hans Momaki
State War Academy
Caldari State
#23 - 2012-02-01 22:03:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Hans Momaki
m3talc0re X wrote:
I don't think that's what he meant. I'm thinking he meant remove that 100% bonus and give it something like a 5% per level bonus or something and have 8 guns fit. They need to leave it at 4 weapon hardpoints and give it like a 120% damage bonus or 100%+a per level bonus. But base it on the battleship, not marauder. The only thing that should be based on Marauders skill level is maybe tanking bonuses.

As for Marauders vs Faction:
Lets look at the problems and arguments...

Resists. Most people say Marauders need a resist boost, I would have to disagree. They do get a little bit better resists (in their race's respective resist types), but not as much as smaller t2 ships. The marauders get a lot more buffer though. The only thing that does kinda suck it makes them a bit harder to omni-tank. If anything, give them a bit more resists across the board. Like the Kronos's massive explosive hole.


Golem has 27,5% more resists compared to CNR. Imho a bit low. But this is the last thing to worry about.

Quote:

Damage. Even with Marauders 5, they're still hard pressed to get the same theoretical dps as faction ships. They don't need a huge buff, just a small one to bring them up to par with faction ships. Without Marauders 5. Having that at 5 should tip the scale and put them a little more powerful than faction. The other problem with this is faction battleships get bonuses that help them apply dps like the marauders. Vindi gets webs, Nightmare gets tracking bonus (which the Paladin simply can't match). The Vargur vs Macharial is fairly well done, imo. I don't see any problems here really. Golem vs CNR... I'm not really sure honestly. I haven't flown a Golem. I would use cruise missiles simply because of the range of torps. It does get a bit less damage than the cnr, but it also gets a couple bonuses to help it apply damage much better than a cnr, so I think it would get the same or better hits than a cnr. I'm not talking eft damage, I'm talking about real in game damage.


CNR vs Golem (both can fit 4 BCU's// without drones)
Cruise missiles: 758 vs 650 (golem with slightly better damage application. More Rigors vs more and bonussed tp's and ship bonus)
Torps: 1390 vs 1192 (golem with way better damage application due to no rigors. CNR with more range on Torps due to rigs)

Well, dmg application is better, don't know if they are even. May be possible, but you know, it's only a CNR worth half the money.

+ Marauders have a better active tank, but round about 30% less buffer compared to CNR.

Quote:
Price. They're about the same. There is no reason a marauder should be getting less DPS as a whole.

CNR is way cheaper then golem. Okey, inflated LP prices...

Quote:
Sensor Strength/Scan Res. There is no damn reason this should be so gimped. The ONLY advantage a marauder would have over a faction battleship is the 3 free high slots. The argument is to keep marauders out of PvP. But what's the point? Even with the three spare highs, they are not going to be one stop killing machines. This may have made since when they were introduced, but it doesn't now. With faction ships becoming more and more common, this point is now moot and needs removed.


Yes, this is hilarious.

All in all, theres no reason to fly a marauder. It's not having a significant advantage (if any).
Atleast, thats my opinion
Zyress
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#24 - 2012-02-01 22:25:57 UTC
I'm not really seeing the appeal of a Marauder at all, I can do lvl 4's in a Drake, a Tengu, or any of the Racial T1 Battleships (all of which can be refit and repurposed to Pvp), never tried a lvl 5, since they aren't in high sec don't think I ever will, just not a place I want to take a mission fit ship. So with all the choices I already have, why would I want to spend all that time training and money on a Marauder, which is purposefully gimped for Pvp so it can never be as flexible and isn't really that much better if at all in Pve.
m3talc0re X
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#25 - 2012-02-01 22:32:08 UTC
Their purpose isn't to be flexible. They're made to be specialized PvE boats. You can't forget this.

Quote:
it's only a CNR worth half the money.

+ Marauders have a better active tank, but round about 30% less buffer compared to CNR.


Forgot to mention that. But only the Navy Faction ships really are lower in cost. The pirate factions are along the same price tags as the marauders. But yeah, comparing the Navy Factions to them as well and they really start to look bad... And I forgot all about the marauders having less buffer than the Faction ships.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#26 - 2012-02-01 22:38:34 UTC
Spugg Galdon wrote:
This is mostly a sum of the the introduction of the Noctis, which has made salvaging "in mission" inefficient compared to reshipping for a Noctis
Not really, no.
The Noctis does not impact on what the Marauders let you do: loot and salvage a bit while you blow through (or even blitz) mission after mission in rapid succession.

The Noctis lets you mass-loot/salvage a lot of missions, which is is useful if you have a lot of them being created at once and if they are not being blitzed. If you're doing it on a single character, it's still of doubtful use to go back and salvage a mission in a Noctis unless you're doing the mission itself very slowly (as in: meh-fitted T1 BS or BC). If you're can dish them out faster than that, you'll still earn more money skipping the loot.

The Noctis works wonderfully as clean-up crew for 4-5 other ships blowing through missions, but that is something quite different than what you do with a Marauder. With them, you have one ship doing this mission, and collecting random debris at the same time, as a bonus, without skipping a beat in the actual gobble-one-mission-after-another process.
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#27 - 2012-02-01 22:50:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Nicolo da'Vicenza
Just give marauders a 25% flat bonus to salvage chances to compete with the noctis, prob solved as far as PvE goes.

The idea of PvE vs PvP exclusivity is going the way of the dodo, what with buffs to faction ships, introduction of T3 and nature of Incursion/Sleeper AI, and the Marauder should follow suit as a ship capable in both PvP and PvE mode.
Spugg Galdon
Last Rites.
Villore Accords
#28 - 2012-02-01 22:56:16 UTC
If you blitz 4 missions, bookmark the wrecks before leaving each mission and return and salvage all 4 it is super fast in the noctis compared to salvaging in the marauder "on the go" which is also extremely taxing and slows your mission blitzing. 
I also mentioned that introducing medium and large tractor beams with longer ranges and velocities designed to be fitted on battleship sized hulls. So we can drop the tractor beam bonus for something that's actually useful
m3talc0re X
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#29 - 2012-02-02 23:29:22 UTC
Forgot to mention this, but I just had a thread on this, too. About 2 or so weeks ago I think?
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=47700&find=unread
Amaroq Dricaldari
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#30 - 2012-02-03 07:59:09 UTC
How about giving them a bonus to Large & Medium Turret Tracking Speed?

This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.

Viribus
TRIBE Reloaded
#31 - 2012-02-03 11:58:02 UTC
I love it when people post that marauders aren't supposed to PVP because they have a low sensor strength, and they have a low sensor strength because they aren't supposed to PVP.

Features & Ideas Discussion at its finest.
Rocky Deadshot
In The Goo
EVE Trade Alliance
#32 - 2012-02-03 12:10:45 UTC
The Vargur is by far the best incursion BS for VGs. Why, you ask? The range of the Mach, the tracking of the Vindi, and just about the same dps as a Mach (more if you figure in the ability to apply it). Now I'm not saying flying a Vargur will get you a fleet... alot of FCs are clueless to how good this ship is, but when you get a smart FC they will snatch you up like no other.
This ship is also probably one of the best mission ships you can fly.
m3talc0re X
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#33 - 2012-02-03 14:47:41 UTC
I use mine for Angels. Unfortunately, I fly armor for incursions and Vargur isn't too good there :(
Ager Agemo
Rainbow Ponies Incorporated
#34 - 2012-02-03 15:18:22 UTC
I never understood, why marauders arent mean for pvp? they are even more expensive than faction battleships, yet PVP wise their perfomance is far below even navy battleships.

it just dosnt makes sense that the high technology ship has weaker sensors than their T1 counterpart.

that and **** it, why we need a ******* ship for pve? make it just like the other ships a ship with a purpose defined by the one flying it.


they should get their tractor and salvage bonuses removed all together and actually become a real battleship instead of a carebear toy.

i would propose they change something like this:


remove salvage/tractor beam stuff, add 1 high slot and 1 mid slot.
simple as that, the ship will get a big increase of dps, and some tanking.

i mean a golem ******* costs 1 bill isk! yet a navy raven for half the price does MORE dps and has a sturdier tank.

they should actually become ships with a focus on nasty pvp. sort of like the Vindicator or bhaalgorn.

no one complains about those ships being OP, despite having MORE dps, tank, speed, than any marauder and being easier to fly.
Hans Momaki
State War Academy
Caldari State
#35 - 2012-02-03 16:15:09 UTC
Ager Agemo wrote:
I never understood, why marauders arent mean for pvp? they are even more expensive than faction battleships, yet PVP wise their perfomance is far below even navy battleships.

it just dosnt makes sense that the high technology ship has weaker sensors than their T1 counterpart.

that and **** it, why we need a ******* ship for pve? make it just like the other ships a ship with a purpose defined by the one flying it.


they should get their tractor and salvage bonuses removed all together and actually become a real battleship instead of a carebear toy.

i would propose they change something like this:


remove salvage/tractor beam stuff, add 1 high slot and 1 mid slot.
simple as that, the ship will get a big increase of dps, and some tanking.

i mean a golem ******* costs 1 bill isk! yet a navy raven for half the price does MORE dps and has a sturdier tank.

they should actually become ships with a focus on nasty pvp. sort of like the Vindicator or bhaalgorn.

no one complains about those ships being OP, despite having MORE dps, tank, speed, than any marauder and being easier to fly.


Marauders have a role allready. The problem is, they just suck in their given role, and they suck at PvE compared to other ships, which are less skill intensive and in atleast one case much cheaper.

Change active tank bonus to resistance bonus, and give them 100% bonusrange on short-range weapons so they can reach the range a mach is having. Incase of the golem, scratch TP bonus and change it to an explosion-radius bonus instead.
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
#36 - 2012-02-03 17:46:09 UTC
People are having problems using both the T2 BS in PvP (except when dropping bazillion BO's)

Introduce a miniaturized siege module the T2 BS can use .. a module that is the same as the regular one but with all values cut by 50-66%. Could replace siege rep bonus with a quadrupling of EHP to make it "work", but should otherwise be perfect for them.
Capital hunters extraordinaire (especially now that SCs are gimped vs. sub-caps) with only 2.5mins commit time, one being self-propelled with lower damage and the other having damage advantage but needing a 'regular' mode of transport.
Xolve
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#37 - 2012-02-03 17:49:22 UTC
Hirana Yoshida wrote:
People are having problems using both the T2 BS in PvP (except when dropping bazillion BO's)

Introduce a miniaturized siege module the T2 BS can use .. a module that is the same as the regular one but with all values cut by 50-66%. Could replace siege rep bonus with a quadrupling of EHP to make it "work", but should otherwise be perfect for them.
Capital hunters extraordinaire (especially now that SCs are gimped vs. sub-caps) with only 2.5mins commit time, one being self-propelled with lower damage and the other having damage advantage but needing a 'regular' mode of transport.


No to Mini-Siege, Mini-Capitals, or any of this other 'Mini' **** you publords want.

Cease this faggotry immediately.
Ocih
Space Mermaids
Somethin Awfull Forums
#38 - 2012-02-03 18:07:25 UTC
Hans Momaki wrote:
m3talc0re X wrote:
I want the tractor bonus, but I want it improved. Give the marauders the same tractor bonus as the noctis then give them a bonus to cut salvager cycle time in half. That would fix the marauder vs noctis problem.


And the "Marauder vs faction BS" - problem?



This.

CS was that last "real" T2 ship. After that they weren't given the T2 resists and they took from tank to excuse the additional "features". Everyone went Nightmare and machariel, they didn't have thier stats punished for thier role bonus. Ships that were supposed to be rare were farmed to standard issue. Better ships because thier Bonus system was based on T1, not T2 with T1 stats.

For me, Nightmare or Paladin. Nighmare has more structure, Armor, shield and better tanking overall.

I can fly both but I'd pick a Nightmare over a Paladin any day.
Amaroq Dricaldari
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#39 - 2012-02-03 19:19:53 UTC
How about tracking speed?

This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.

Xolve
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#40 - 2012-02-03 19:43:39 UTC
The root cause of Marauders being so terrible at their given role, is simply because we have T3's now, as before we didn't and they just happen to be better at shooting at things then the T2 battleships intended for PvE.

They've been outclassed, and are just something for bitter vets that actually trained Marauder V to whine about.