These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page12
 

after the hac/cs beating, Fozzie is afraid to post the marauder changes.. =)

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Debora Tsung
Perkone
Caldari State
#21 - 2013-08-20 10:28:56 UTC
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
1. increase tractor range and speed to compete with the noctis
2. give a salvage bonus
3. allow pilots to accept and complete missions remotely, or run multiple missions for a single agent.

Then the marauder could really, "go for long periods behind enemy lines" - provided those enemies were NPCs...


It's still wrong.

Noctis has 8 High slots just for tractor beams and slavagers. using anything else for salvaging is just slow, tedious and not worth the time.

Stupidity should be a bannable offense.

Fighting back is more fun than not.

Sticky: AFK Cloaking Thread It's not pretty, but it's there.
Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#22 - 2013-08-20 13:23:05 UTC
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
If by coma-inducing sessions you mean pve missions where you salvage everything then yes. That is what these ships are specifically and deliberately designed for. The designed team deliberately nerfed the sensor strength to actively discourage their use in PVP.


Let's not forget that Eve is a game and it should have at least some fun factor involved. And I honestly don't see where fun factor can be found while flying marauders. Waiting 20 seconds for lock is not exactly fun you know, not even when amount of power you can unleash on already locked targets is godlike (which is not, pirate BSs can top those values "easily").

Maybe some bonus to sensor boosters would be a good idea for those ships? You would need to sacrifice med slot(s) to being able lock anything in pvp relevant times so less slots for shield tank/ewar. I won't pretend I can calculate pros and cons of such change but why marauders shouldn't be viable pvp ships?

Invalid signature format
Mole Guy
Bob's Bait and Tackle
#23 - 2013-08-20 13:36:41 UTC
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
Wait a minute fellas, marauders are pve ships. they are designed exclusively to be good at pve and bad at pvp. Hence the sensor strength.

Isn't what you want another class of T2 battleship for pvp?

But what would that look like? Mega-tanking monsters with huge dps, multi-neuts and a sensor strength of 50? It's way too OP.

Black ops is a nice idea but the ships themselves are too weak. Perhaps they need to be pimped a bit, or maybe able to warp cloaked...

While I agree in principle with the idea of battleships with extra abilities/strengths from their T2 status, I can't think of anything offhand that does not either break the game or step on the toes of faction/pirate battleships.

This is probably why the design team has not offered anything.

they were designed WAY back in the day to be that as a power balance thing. but, times have changed. in their presentation, they specifically stated they dont like assigning ships to either pvp or pve but instead give us a ship and watch how WE play with it.

the pirate ships have gotten SO much more powerful than ANY marauder in ANY field (except tractor and salvage).
im ok with that, but to keep the ship gimped and not let it compete with anything is obsurd.

hell some bc are gaining on the dps side of a marauder. eve grew up. its being rebalanced. time to shed the old stigma surrounded this ship and make it a viable t2 fit warship.

and as was stated, i really care the direction they are going. he said they have a kewl idea...inquiring minds want to know.
Mole Guy
Bob's Bait and Tackle
#24 - 2013-08-20 13:54:23 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
What is up with all the impatience and calling CCP Fozzie "afraid"? Shocked

did u see the ---> =) <---
smiley face...means i was grinning when i said it. joking at the hundreds of pages about hacs and command ship bashing they have taken this month.
Batelle
Federal Navy Academy
#25 - 2013-08-20 16:18:08 UTC
marauders should be a step above (most) of the pirate battleships in terms of dps and either projection or application, while continuing to be slower and with lower base HP. After all T2 = specialization, and right now pirate BS do the marauder role better than marauders without the downsides of crap electronics.

compared to t2 frigates and cruisers, the t2 resistance advantage of marauders is not huge. Raising their t2 resistances slightly would make them better in PVE, logi-supported PVP, make them tankier in solo applications, and accentuate one of their distinguishing characteristics over pirate ships.

improving sensor strength would make them more viable in PVP. It could be improved without eliminating this as a weakness or a distinguishing characteristic. I think marauders should be a viable fleet doctrine, and we would have an interesting situation where the ECM counter is done by jamming the DPS instead of the typical ECM targets like logi.

Marauder bonuses definitely need a look at. I think they should (continue to) be interesting and not restricted by racial lines of "TPs and webs belong to minmatar." Their local rep bonus and the tractor beam bonus is more or less fine, even if the goal is to make them viable PvP ships.

The trait of marauders using less turrets with the 100% bonus is a distinguishing characteristic that should be maintained.

"**CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"**

Never forget.
zbaaca
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
#26 - 2013-08-20 17:51:52 UTC
Batelle wrote:

The trait of marauders using less turrets with the 100% bonus is a distinguishing characteristic that should be maintained.

there is a flaw in ur logic , look to cruise golem and it loss of dps from defenders.

Bugs are opportunities to cause unprecedented amounts of destruction. --Zorgn ♡♡♡

ISD LackOfFaith
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#27 - 2013-08-20 17:55:40 UTC
Quote:
5. Trolling is prohibited.

Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.

22. Post constructively.

Negative feedback can be very useful to further improve EVE Online provided that it is presented in a civil and factual manner. All users are encouraged to honestly express their feelings regarding EVE Online and how it can be improved. Posts that are non-constructive, insulting or in breach of the rules will be deleted regardless of how valid the ideas behind them may be. Users are also reminded that posting with a lack of content also constitutes non-constructive posting.

Thread locked.

ISD LackOfFaith

Captain

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

I do not respond to Eve Mail or anything other than the forums.
Previous page12