These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

CCP- what r you guys thinking towards marauders? not finished stats, just general role change

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Chimpface Holocaust
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#181 - 2013-07-01 15:20:15 UTC
The Djego wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
You guys are still thinking along the wrong lines.

This isn't going to be about smooshing red pluses even faster.


Malc, can you please tell Fozzy to ask people that actually use marauders effectively before he changes anything?

In my opinion, give them not a terrible sensor strength and proper lock speed(since you lock small stuff all the time in pve) and bring her sigs down(it makes them far more flimsy as they need to be in stuff like Incs and WH) and a extra 50-100 calibration points to do full T2 rigging.

Paladin is good, maybe a extra 25m³ drone bay to do 3 sentrys + spare lights(I really love my the 3 sentry's in my Inc Pala).
Vargur is good, if you nerf down the mach a bit. It could receive a fitting bonus like the tier 3 BCs to fit artillery while still being unable to do acs + heavy neuts. A bit more cap and speed would be nice, for mwd fittings.
Golem needs a Torp rework and more speed + cap for mwd fittings.
Kronos needs 125/275m³ drone bay to carry 2 full sets of sentry's(close and long range) to make up for rail dps and improve the flexibility of the hull also a bit more speed for rail kitting fittings would be nice

Butcher the active tanking bonuses, they are hardly useful for L4(since you don't really need a tank) and useless for WH or Incs, where you don't use active tanking.

Paladin: Tracking would be good, optimal would be preferred, since amarr and lasers are so weak(according to the forums)
Vargur: I don't really know, double tracking or optimal bonus would be nice for artillery same as a double falloff would be cool for acs, but then again there is little what helps both.
Golem: 10% per level torpedo explosion velocity, yes a effective tipple explosion velocity bonus, mixing torps that are less affected by speed with super powerful paining to make it more attractive compared to CM setups
Kronos: Drone optimal/tracking same as it is on the new Domi, making it a full sentry/rail mixed weapon system and a fusion out of domi and mega, effective at any possible lock range

As for utility bonuses, for L4 improve the tractor range a bit(60km with T2 so 25% more) and double the chance for the salvager. For WH and Incs, add 100% range to cap transfer and RR and reduce the cap need by 25%, to further improve her superior spider tanking and logistic capability(what is already a good feature and a huge plus point compared to faction BS) in pve gangs.


I stopped reading after "you don't really need a tank"

Maybe you don't need a tank because you sit at 100k and pop things at your leisure then use your MJD to get out when things get close. some of us like to stay close range and be in the thick of it, and those of us that do most definitely need a tank.
Gimme more Cynos
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#182 - 2013-07-01 15:49:35 UTC
Fozzy saying "cool concept" means they will be crap and noone will like them.
Freighdee Katt
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#183 - 2013-07-01 15:55:49 UTC
Gimme more Cynos wrote:
Fozzy saying "cool concept" means they will be crap and noone will like them.

Well you have to understand what they mean when they say "balance."

Balance does not mean that after they're done each ship is good in its own way and no ship dominates all others. It means that when you take all the "balance" efforts together, they're a zero sum. So for every useless hull that gets made useful, one useful hull needs to be made awful. That way it all "balances out."

The fact that they think Marauders are in need of "big changes" does pretty strongly indicate that they're going to land on the "useful ships being made awful" side of the scale. They are sure to get changed in ways that nobody who uses them asked for, wanted, or will like. But that's ok, cause we'll all just "adapt."

EvE is supposed to suck.  Wait . . . what was the question?
Gimme more Cynos
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#184 - 2013-07-01 16:02:56 UTC
Freighdee Katt wrote:
Gimme more Cynos wrote:
Fozzy saying "cool concept" means they will be crap and noone will like them.

Well you have to understand what they mean when they say "balance."

Balance does not mean that after they're done each ship is good in its own way and no ship dominates all others. It means that when you take all the "balance" efforts together, they're a zero sum. So for every useless hull that gets made useful, one useful hull needs to be made awful. That way it all "balances out."

The fact that they think Marauders are in need of "big changes" does pretty strongly indicate that they're going to land on the "useful ships being made awful" side of the scale. They are sure to get changed in ways that nobody who uses them asked for, wanted, or will like. But that's ok, cause we'll all just "adapt."


I'm not having a prob with the ships - it's just that I don't think Fozzy can come up with something cool.. sry What? It would suprise me a lot if marauders would be cool at some point soon™.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#185 - 2013-07-01 16:04:28 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
You guys are still thinking along the wrong lines.

This isn't going to be about smooshing red pluses even faster.


Glad to see that you now dropped any facade about the CSM "only a sounding board for CCP" and are now acting like you speak directly for the dev team.

And we have always known where you stand on high sec income streams.


That they should be increased, more fun, and riskier?

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Loki Feiht
Warcrows
THE OLD SCHOOL
#186 - 2013-07-01 16:16:35 UTC
Keep Marauders as Marauders and introduce new line t2 battleships (and possibly battlecruisers) there are plenty of ideas floating about

My favourate idea at the moment is the 'mini dread' idea (battleship that can enter seige mode but has defence similar to black ops ships (no not 20k dps, stop thinking so damned linear!)

More NPC - Randomly Generated Modular Content thread https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=220858
The Djego
Hellequin Inc.
#187 - 2013-07-01 16:32:39 UTC  |  Edited by: The Djego
Chimpface Holocaust wrote:
I stopped reading after "you don't really need a tank"

Maybe you don't need a tank because you sit at 100k and pop things at your leisure then use your MJD to get out when things get close. some of us like to stay close range and be in the thick of it, and those of us that do most definitely need a tank.


No you don't need a tank because L4 does hilarious low damage to you once you can gank stuff quick. I never use a MJD because it is just a wast of a slot in a gank fitted marauder or faction BS.

This are some of the missions that actually throw some dps your way, since people always have issues seeing my point I made some vids about how to do them.

AE Bonus in a Kronos with a 300 DPS tank:

http://dl.eve-files.com/media/0810/AE_Bonus_Kronos.wmv

Recon 1/3 with a 200 dps tank(I fly most missions in that Abaddon with a 130 DPS tank):

http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1305/Abaddon_L4_Recon_1.mkv

Improve discharge rigging: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=246166&find=unread
Ewersmen
Perkone
Caldari State
#188 - 2013-07-01 18:02:23 UTC
All they need is more tank .....DPS Is good .....Don't need changes ccp just more tank ....YOU CAN BET CCP IS GOING TO STUFF EM UP WITH SOME DUMB CHANGES THAT NOBODY WANTS ..

Because that's what there good at.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#189 - 2013-07-01 18:30:44 UTC
The Djego wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
You guys are still thinking along the wrong lines.

This isn't going to be about smooshing red pluses even faster.


Malc, can you please tell Fozzy to ask people that actually use marauders effectively before he changes anything...?

~a load of stuff about how to make Marauders better for smooshing red pluses~



What we have here is, a failure to communicate.


And then you get what we see here.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
The Djego
Hellequin Inc.
#190 - 2013-07-01 19:03:09 UTC  |  Edited by: The Djego
Malcanis wrote:
The Djego wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
You guys are still thinking along the wrong lines.

This isn't going to be about smooshing red pluses even faster.


Malc, can you please tell Fozzy to ask people that actually use marauders effectively before he changes anything...?

~a load of stuff about how to make Marauders better for smooshing red pluses~



What we have here is, a failure to communicate.


And then you get what we see here.


No, I think we don't have that communication problem here, even if I would appreciate it if you spend some effort typing down a real argument and try to make a actual point. Marauders where designed to not be BS+1 for pvp, while you and some of the new guys at CCP might consider a different role, keep in mind that marauders already got her role for the simple reason that most other roles where utterly ****(sup black ops) and BS sized HAC would be terrible for the game balance(exactly why a role where pvp balance where off the table was chosen). What I posted where suggestions how to make them a bit better in what reasonable people use them for as we speak. While it might not be your ideal design goal, you should consider it as fair suggestion from somebody that actually used all the hulls in question for the thing they where actually designed for.

I for myself have a no issues at all with the role marauders got, they are useful and got a ok niche. Given I can't think of something else that would be as useful while not being overpowered, I wish you guys good luck with that project, seriously I do, but expect a lot of people actually using the hulls for what they been made for not really happy about it.

Improve discharge rigging: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=246166&find=unread
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#191 - 2013-07-01 19:16:53 UTC
Sure I'll break the NDA for you immediately, check your PMs

I'm just saying if i'm right about my guess, then don't pin your hopes on an incremental improvement on the marauder's ratting power, but expect a completely new role to be added to the marauders' repetoire.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
The Djego
Hellequin Inc.
#192 - 2013-07-01 19:43:46 UTC  |  Edited by: The Djego
I don't want you to break the NDA, because this would be a stupid thing for you to do(and I would be probably not really impressed with what I see anyway).

Marauders got her role for a reason, if you remove here worst handicaps(like the stuff I mentioned) they would do a fairly competitive job to faction BS, no matter if you got squares or crosses on your overview. I actually like the idea that the design is a bit more complex, rewarding teamwork and providing you with unique bonus combinations that you don't have on the other hulls, giving you different options compared to faction BS.

Stuff like RR cap use and range, tractor range and salvaging stuff are role bonuses, if you use the hull for that they are handy, if not you don't lose anything, so it only improves flexibility. As for being creative with new roles, I didn't see it really happen since HICs(that got into the game because of low sec moms), every time something new comes in it was plain better(tier 2 BCs, T3, tier 3 BCs) before the community accepted it. While the opposite is also bad(hi again black ops), sometimes aiming for something different should be enough, and this is what the better marauders are as we speak.

Improve discharge rigging: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=246166&find=unread
Endeavour Starfleet
#193 - 2013-07-01 21:33:04 UTC
Personally (And sorry if someone else had this idea before me) I believe that the same treatment to other lines of ships that broke homogenization should happen to Marauders

Each ship should have a different role to play.

For instance in my opinion one needs to become a ship designed to carry a module that runs to attract aggro in spider tanked groups. Very beefy tank and has a good chance to keep the rats on the ship in exchange for little offensive DPS.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#194 - 2013-07-01 21:48:21 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Sure I'll break the NDA for you immediately, check your PMs

I'm just saying if i'm right about my guess, then don't pin your hopes on an incremental improvement on the marauder's ratting power, but expect a completely new role to be added to the marauders' repetoire.

Interesting.

Personally I could see a case being made to have Marauders become the more combat oriented Black Ops BS, while retaining some of it's current characteristics.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Freighdee Katt
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#195 - 2013-07-01 22:08:52 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
I'm just saying if i'm right about my guess, then don't pin your hopes on an incremental improvement on the marauder's ratting power, but expect a completely new role to be added to the marauders' repetoire.

So basically they're going to add some wonky new thing nobody asked for, address none of their current issues, and then "balance" them by leaving them a little worse in a few areas where they were already bad.

EvE is supposed to suck.  Wait . . . what was the question?
Endeavour Starfleet
#196 - 2013-07-01 22:13:02 UTC
Freighdee Katt wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
I'm just saying if i'm right about my guess, then don't pin your hopes on an incremental improvement on the marauder's ratting power, but expect a completely new role to be added to the marauders' repetoire.

So basically they're going to add some wonky new thing nobody asked for, address none of their current issues, and then "balance" them by leaving them a little worse in a few areas where they were already bad.


It depends on what they add.

For instance the Golem badly suffers from defender missile use by NPCs right? Turning that ship into my idea of a ship that attracts the attention of NPCs and tanks it would be potentially very useful for group PVE activities in the game.

These ships can be rebalanced into specific tasks.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#197 - 2013-07-01 22:17:36 UTC
Freighdee Katt wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
I'm just saying if i'm right about my guess, then don't pin your hopes on an incremental improvement on the marauder's ratting power, but expect a completely new role to be added to the marauders' repetoire.

So basically they're going to add some wonky new thing nobody asked for, address none of their current issues, and then "balance" them by leaving them a little worse in a few areas where they were already bad.

I would not go that far in assuming.

To call the marauder class successful and popular, it does not follow what we know of it's intended use, and the ships most popular in this niche.

For something this focused on training and equipment costs, the marauder should have obvious benefits and only be overlooked because of this cost and / or skill demand.
But this is not the case, as faction ships are frequently shown as equally if not more effective in the role expected for the marauder.

And while those faction ships are not cheap, they also function well in PvP, if you can get past their cost to replace.
The marauder does not, as it's design gives it a specific sensor weakness not shared with the competing faction hulls.

It may have started as THE mission super ship, but it has not held this title, and is due for a refit.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Kraschyn Thek'athor
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#198 - 2013-07-02 01:22:17 UTC
Cool idea in progress?


We get some jingles, with Dev voices. Little motivation speeches, while doing mission runs.
"Yea, World Collide best Collisions".
"Here comes the money for your next Aurum. Dress today for the party tomorow."
"Nobody excepts the spanish inquisition."
"Let me touch your Pod...."
DSpite Culhach
#199 - 2013-07-02 05:29:57 UTC
Better at PvE without unbalancing PvP capabilities? Easy.

"50% Improved damage when shooting NPC ships"

Ok, ok, NOT that one, but since Marauders are (supposed to be) such specialized "PvE hulls" should they not have design features that would make them especially capable when facing NPC ships?

If we simply discount extra damage or better tanks - cause technically it's rather generic ideas - surely there is something that would come to players mind?

CCP could easily add a one liner to the Marauders that states "... onboard computers adjust modules capabilities based on known data on Pirate crafts" - which unlike players ships, are always the same (with special NPC's being excluded for example) and then throw in a pool of initially hidden bonuses to Marauders.

As players, we would notice things like getting more "wrecking" hits (because our targeting computers know the weak spots), or our drones getting aggroed less (cause our shots aggro more then the drones), or less effective npc ECM on us, or enemy defender missiles failing more ... I mean, you can make changes to a Marauder that isn't just "moar damn DPS" and still make it a better mission runner, and a UNIQUE mission runner at that.

... oh yea, throw in something specifically for Sleepers, that way people will suddenly drag lots of them in WH. Pretty sure that will be a laugh a minute.

I apparently have no idea what I'm doing.
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
#200 - 2013-07-02 05:56:28 UTC
DSpite Culhach wrote:
`snip`

Introducing split mechanic for PvP/PvE isnt something desired in sandbox game.

Opinions are like assholes. Everybody got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks.