These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Rubicon] Marauder rebalancing

First post First post First post
Author
Tzel Mayon
Perkone
Caldari State
#441 - 2013-08-30 03:46:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Tzel Mayon
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Forget my other ideas - I just had a wild and crazy one...

bas·tion
• a well-fortified position
• a projecting part of a fortification
• a stronghold into which people could go for shelter during a battle

Suggestion for skill name - "Redoubt" or "Garrison". Bastion works as originally proposed with one key difference: it absorbs ALL incoming fire within a 2.5km radius during its cycle. Thus, it actually functions as its name implies: a stronghold where sub capital ships can temporarily seek a reprieve. It's also unique from Siege or Triage, and might provide an interesting gameplay element.



A Portable PoS! I still think that it would be better as a Command Battleship--give it a Ship Maintenance bay too! The "Bastion" shield though, I think should expand more then 2.5k based on some skill... or better yet, the bastion "field" could be an armor or shield thing... not just a shield ...

We could fuel it with Strontium Clathrates. :)

I think we have taken this particular concept /way/ into absurdity now, though. I think some thought should be done on CCP's part.... Lock the thread, go back to the drawing board... and start over with the basic concepts, but cleary distinguishing the idea of being a "Brick and Space" and a "Harassment Marauder".

Two completely different ideas--that they are trying to fuse into one.
ISD Cura Ursus
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
#442 - 2013-08-30 03:48:43 UTC
Removed a couple of off topic posts.

ISD Cura Ursus

Lieutenant Commander

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

Catherine Laartii
Doomheim
#443 - 2013-08-30 03:50:04 UTC
Javon Bars wrote:
Why would anyone possibly enter bastion for gang pvp?

The tanking bonus prevents you from receiving reps, effectively nerfing your tank. You don't get a damage bonus and the optimal range bonus is pointless because currently large long-range weapon systems already provide all the range you'll ever need. EW immunity is pointless because you're going to be out of EW range. There is no reason at all to enter bastion as it is.

Unless it gives a significant damage bonus, you're just painting yourself a large bullseye and waiting to die, particularly because both scanning and even a dictor burning will cover the distance in less than the 60 seconds bastion takes.


Also: please, please stop bringing out new skills which only apply to one single module and nothing else. It makes a mockery out of the versatility the skill system the game has. Tactical weapon reconfiguration already covers this scenario. "But TWR lowers consumption and bastion consumes nothing!" isn't a viable excuse because covert jump bridges also consume nothing despite needing a skill that reduces consumption trained.


Sure, bastion seems nice for running plexes and anoms but don't try to sell it to us as some sort of pvp feature, at least with this iteration.


Why would anyone use a marauder for pvp? Why would you waste isk on that when you can just get a faction BC for roughly the same price and significantly better usage?
Ravasta Helugo
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#444 - 2013-08-30 03:50:36 UTC
Battle Cube wrote:
Ravasta Helugo wrote:
Battle Cube wrote:
... its not good in L4s...

Wat


its not higher damage, so it doesnt do L4s faster then current ships, so it has higher tank....which is unnecessary, so yeah, its not any better than current ships for L4s

You're missing the part where it has 25-30% farther effective range, is immune to NPC EWAR and much of it's tank is now inherent to the Bastion module, freeing up a low/mid slot for targeting/damage mods.
Battle Cube
Cube Collective
#445 - 2013-08-30 03:50:52 UTC
Chainsaw Plankton wrote:
Battle Cube wrote:
Ravasta Helugo wrote:
Battle Cube wrote:
... its not good in L4s...

Wat


its not higher damage, so it doesnt do L4s faster then current ships, so it has higher tank....which is unnecessary, so yeah, its not any better than current ships for L4s


2 slot tank (3 slots if you count the bastion mod), immune to ewar, so much room for damage mods. seems pretty damn good to me.


immune to eware, till you get out of bastion, when you want to i dont know, warp out, but are now scrambled and cant use MJD. So nerfed tank when not in bastion - decent tank when in bastion and therefore higher damage due to fitting....but we will have to see if that increased damage from fitting compares to the old version of say, vargur, or pirate BSs. I dont think it will be worth it. Certainly not just because of the inconvenience of the way you have to fly with bastion, but thats just taste.
Battle Cube
Cube Collective
#446 - 2013-08-30 03:53:56 UTC
Ravasta Helugo wrote:
Battle Cube wrote:
Ravasta Helugo wrote:
Battle Cube wrote:
... its not good in L4s...

Wat


its not higher damage, so it doesnt do L4s faster then current ships, so it has higher tank....which is unnecessary, so yeah, its not any better than current ships for L4s

You're missing the part where it has 25-30% farther effective range, is immune to NPC EWAR and much of it's tank is now inherent to the Bastion module, freeing up a low/mid slot for targeting/damage mods.


range is just a part of calculating effective dps, especially for L4s - i could fit a ship to have a certain dps, then simply move myself into position to do that dps effectively higher than having a longer range.

I could see the vargur being a lot better in missions if all they did was maybe add a lowslot and increased PG, then its falloff would be great for 800mm for effective damage in missions, but i could always just grab a tachyon ship and obliterate anything in any effective range without moving anyway
Jenn aSide
Shinigami Miners
Already Replaced.
#447 - 2013-08-30 03:54:05 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
Will the Bastion module be high slot? Or are we going to see a clear bias against shield or armour fleets when it turns out to be a mid or low slot?


Did you not read the OP? Especially the part about how marauders will all have 8 highs on account of the bastion module?
Ariak Rykard
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#448 - 2013-08-30 03:54:14 UTC
Given the ridiculous amount of training required to fly one of these ships, one expects it to be at least 3x better than even pirate faction.

Either that, or take off 90% off the training requirements.

    ̿ ̿̿̿̿'̿'\̵͇̿̿\==((•̪●))==/̵͇̿̿/'̿̿ ̿ ̿ b(",b) ob(-.0)do (d.")d

Tzel Mayon
Perkone
Caldari State
#449 - 2013-08-30 03:54:41 UTC
Ravasta Helugo wrote:
Battle Cube wrote:
Ravasta Helugo wrote:
Battle Cube wrote:
... its not good in L4s...

Wat


its not higher damage, so it doesnt do L4s faster then current ships, so it has higher tank....which is unnecessary, so yeah, its not any better than current ships for L4s

You're missing the part where it has 25-30% farther effective range, is immune to NPC EWAR and much of it's tank is now inherent to the Bastion module, freeing up a low/mid slot for targeting/damage mods.


I think the point was that the Marauder would effectively be replaced by Pirate Battleships for DPS.

The Marauder would effectively be primarily used as a "brick" in space, with some support DPS.

It appears that Pirate ships are slated to be the primary source of DPS in LVL IVs...

Incursions, though, would benefit from the sniping and local tank capabilities of the Bastion Mode.

But again, this is /completely contradictory to the concept of "Hit and Run Harassment" goal stated for the Marauders/. Two completely mutually exclusive ideas... -- unless you remove the local tank bonuses, and decrease the time it takes to get in and out of siege mode... -- essentially making a battleship version of a hit and run stealth bomber.
Battle Cube
Cube Collective
#450 - 2013-08-30 03:57:37 UTC
Tzel Mayon wrote:
Ravasta Helugo wrote:
Battle Cube wrote:
Ravasta Helugo wrote:
Battle Cube wrote:
... its not good in L4s...

Wat


its not higher damage, so it doesnt do L4s faster then current ships, so it has higher tank....which is unnecessary, so yeah, its not any better than current ships for L4s

You're missing the part where it has 25-30% farther effective range, is immune to NPC EWAR and much of it's tank is now inherent to the Bastion module, freeing up a low/mid slot for targeting/damage mods.


I think the point was that the Marauder would effectively be replaced by Pirate Battleships for DPS.

The Marauder would effectively be primarily used as a "brick" in space, with some support DPS.

It appears that Pirate ships are slated to be the primary source of DPS in LVL IVs...

Incursions, though, would benefit from the sniping and local tank capabilities of the Bastion Mode.

But again, this is /completely contradictory to the concept of "Hit and Run Harassment" goal stated for the Marauders/. Two completely mutually exclusive ideas... -- unless you remove the local tank bonuses, and decrease the time it takes to get in and out of siege mode... -- essentially making a battleship version of a hit and run stealth bomber.


you dont local tank incursions, and we already have ships that have sniping range necessary in incursions, in fact most incurison communities are moving away from sniping fits and into projected dps (like sub80km) and simply moving into position, the effective damage is much higher than using normal snipers. So it def it not a good ship for incursions
Tzel Mayon
Perkone
Caldari State
#451 - 2013-08-30 03:57:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Tzel Mayon
The Standard Question: "If you can fly it now, will you be able to fly it later?"

Assuming the answer is, "Yes" ...

Will this new "Bastion" / "Tactical Weapon Reconfiguration" skill now be required for Marauders. If so, what level?

And, if we can already fly Marauders, will we be credited this skill? I would like this formally stated in the O.P. if possible to avoid this question being asked in Help over and Over again without an actual reference to provide.

Thanks!
Battle Cube
Cube Collective
#452 - 2013-08-30 03:59:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Battle Cube
Ariak Rykard wrote:
Given the ridiculous amount of training required to fly one of these ships, one expects it to be at least 3x better than even pirate faction.

Either that, or take off 90% off the training requirements.


a ship with high isk requirements should be good at something
a ship with high sp requirements should be good at something
a ship with high isk AND sp requirements, should be REALLY ******* GOOD at something

... yeah i am in favor of it simply being better than pirate, or at least having a REAL seige mode with huge damage bonus....


... it needs to be REALLY good in order to Justify both costs
Ravasta Helugo
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#453 - 2013-08-30 04:00:41 UTC
Tzel Mayon wrote:
Ravasta Helugo wrote:
Battle Cube wrote:
Ravasta Helugo wrote:
Battle Cube wrote:
... its not good in L4s...

Wat


its not higher damage, so it doesnt do L4s faster then current ships, so it has higher tank....which is unnecessary, so yeah, its not any better than current ships for L4s

You're missing the part where it has 25-30% farther effective range, is immune to NPC EWAR and much of it's tank is now inherent to the Bastion module, freeing up a low/mid slot for targeting/damage mods.


I think the point was that the Marauder would effectively be replaced by Pirate Battleships for DPS.

The Marauder would effectively be primarily used as a "brick" in space, with some support DPS.

It appears that Pirate ships are slated to be the primary source of DPS in LVL IVs....

Please explain that to me in more detail.

Right now, using the Nightmare and Paladin as an example, the Nightmare has more applied DPS because of it's tracking bonus. However theoretical DPS of both ships is the same.

That isn't going to change. And now the Paladin will be immune to EWAR, vastly raising it's DPS over the Nightmare in certain missions- as well as making every mission feasible to run (I am looking at you, perma-jamming Gurista bastards.) The Paladin will now have unquestionably better range as well, not to mention that it will be indestructible to all but a large, expensive suicide gank squad.
zbaaca
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
#454 - 2013-08-30 04:03:43 UTC
-1 for rebalance because :
1) every 1 got rid from ewar only golem have one . just waste of med slot. on roams we have matar recons with TP and what CCP Ytterbium achieved that we have not just useless but contradictory bonus on fights that he was mentioned.
just add another sig speed or radius bonus istead (or maybe resists and make it second damnation Big smile)
2) range bonus for missiles , let's see... it's fine if u use torps and total overkill for cruise. but why use torp ? please tell me who uses torp fits now ? so we have useless bonus or this is supposed hidden hint to torp rebalance ?

btw : yay for steamrollin' guris !

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

Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#455 - 2013-08-30 04:05:19 UTC
Sarmatiko wrote:
Bienator II wrote:
here a question: after this is released, why would anybody fly something else for pve?

I don't know about you, but as operator of help channel with 800+ players at prime, everyday I see recommendations to get a Tengu, Nightmare and Machariel for PVE. Any argument in defense of Marauders breaks against arrogant public opinion "Marauders are not worth invested training time, just get a Pirate BS or CNR".
Now this will change.

and thats better in your opinion? Replace x ships with 4?

how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value

Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#456 - 2013-08-30 04:07:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Tzel Mayon wrote:
A Portable PoS! I still think that it would be better as a Command Battleship--give it a Ship Maintenance bay too! The "Bastion" shield though, I think should expand more then 2.5k based on some skill... or better yet, the bastion "field" could be an armor or shield thing... not just a shield ...

We could fuel it with Strontium Clathrates. :)

I think we have taken this particular concept /way/ into absurdity now, though. I think some thought should be done on CCP's part.... Lock the thread, go back to the drawing board... and start over with the basic concepts, but cleary distinguishing the idea of being a "Brick and Space" and a "Harassment Marauder".


I was just thinking more along the line of the actual definition, which is an extended fortification. The idea was it would temporarily divert and absorb all incoming fire to shields, armor and hull. So it could act as a temporary reprieve for other ships to rearm, repair or retreat.

I was thinking heavy water, but Strontium Clathrates could work too. :D

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Battle Cube
Cube Collective
#457 - 2013-08-30 04:13:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Battle Cube
Ravasta Helugo wrote:

Please explain that to me in more detail.

Right now, using the Nightmare and Paladin as an example, the Nightmare has more applied DPS because of it's tracking bonus. However theoretical DPS of both ships is the same.

That isn't going to change. And now the Paladin will be immune to EWAR, vastly raising it's DPS over the Nightmare in certain missions- as well as making every mission feasible to run (I am looking at you, perma-jamming Gurista bastards.) The Paladin will now have unquestionably better range as well, not to mention that it will be indestructible to all but a large, expensive suicide gank squad.



i def see the higher dps for when there is ewar, personally i see this as a situation where flying with 2 poeple in a mission (or dualboxing) is awesome. and if you have to go solo, then yeah it helps....but there are very few missions where this is a problem in my experience. Range though, if you are running tachyons you will still be in effective range regardless, i think my nightmare does multi at like up to 50 (like opt+1/2falloff is like 85% damage) so unless there are a significant number of npcs slightly further then this range, then yeah the marauder would have much more effective damage....but if its significantly further then you are just switching ammo to lower damage longer range like usual, and not as much of a boost in my oppinion

and also the marauder wont be able to move during this time..... and when it is moving (not via mjd) it will be VERY slow, so moving into effective range will be difficult and the slowness of this will reduce effective dps


And speaking of rare missions - any missions with GATES will make the new marauders just unusable. Anything with gates, really.
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#458 - 2013-08-30 04:14:20 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Mara Rinn wrote:
Will the Bastion module be high slot? Or are we going to see a clear bias against shield or armour fleets when it turns out to be a mid or low slot?


Did you not read the OP? Especially the part about how marauders will all have 8 highs on account of the bastion module?


Thank you for your polite and reasonable response :P
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#459 - 2013-08-30 04:14:37 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
YaSiS wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
I'll make sure we talk tomorrow about the tracking bonus for turret ships (I had understood that neither turrets or missiles were getting an application bonus). I believe its meant to say 25% optimal and 25% falloff.

Either way it won't be unequal as it is currently listed.


Who cares about this?
You are wrecking both the Kronos and Paladin by removing a key element: the web bonuses, plus gimping all of them in DPS by nerfing the drone bays.

Yah, you have made this into a PvP ship, but once again wrecked another PvE ship.

All part of the plan, I assume.


+1


I'm not sure I follow this Shocked - if you're talking about missions, a web bonus is not needed - with turrets, you snipe the frigates first before they come in close. Even when they do come close, a 90% web usually isn't enough to keep transversal down to hit them with large guns.

When they're close, use drones - and Marauders still have enough dronebay to use lights and take care of that. With missiles, bit pointless to shoot frigates first. In all cases the web strength is highly situational in missions. Maybe using 2 webs? But that's a bit overkill when they can just be dealt faster with drones while you focus on larger ships with guns.

However, the extra resists, damage projection, EW immunity is going to be of tremendous help in missions like "The Blockade" where there are 1346454 NPCs using E-war while in Bastion mode. Even without it, Kronos and Paladin new falloff and optimal range bonuses are going to be useful 100% of the time, instead of extreme close range like a web bonus.



Looks like other people have beaten me to the post on hammering your logic. I really question if you have tested this much at all.

First off, as others have said, the 90% web bonus DOES allow you to nail frigs close. Two webs, and they are doing 1.3% of their top speed. In a mission, the elite frigs will trash small drones in seconds (thanks Fozzie for that one), so you NEED webs to ensure the guns can nail the elite frigs

Second, wrecking the drone bay is simply dumb. People use that for Sentry DPS, or salvage drones. Why are you gimping the effective DPS on these ships? And please don't talk to me about how the improved range on guns will improve effective DPS. On long range stuff, sure. But try running Buzzkill, or the 2nd room of Worlds Collide, where stuff is ON TOP of you, when you land.

As for the other issues, I am too tired to deal with it tonight.
Suffice to say, you are gimping the effective damage on these ships, which is just ridiculous.
Katrina Oniseki
Oniseki-Raata Internal Watch
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
#460 - 2013-08-30 04:16:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Katrina Oniseki
Tzel Mayon wrote:
The Standard Question: "If you can fly it now, will you be able to fly it later?"

Assuming the answer is, "Yes" ...

Will this new "Bastion" / "Tactical Weapon Reconfiguration" skill now be required for Marauders. If so, what level?

And, if we can already fly Marauders, will we be credited this skill? I would like this formally stated in the O.P. if possible to avoid this question being asked in Help over and Over again without an actual reference to provide.

Thanks!


CCP doesn't gift you free skills when they add them. CCP has also said nothing about making the new skill a requirement to fly the ship. It's required to use the module, but not the ship.

Even if it is added as a requirement for flying a Marauder, you will probably NOT get the required skill levels credited when it hits. You would STILL be able to actually fly the Marauder, as it is not the final required skill to fly it - which is called "Marauders". As long as you already have Marauders level 1 trained, you can still fly it.

See the recent skill changes to which you refer for evidence. Changes were made to carrier requirements, but as long as people had the racial carrier skill trained to 1 (same as before), they could still fly them afterwards without the changed support skills being at the correct level.

CCP will likely not answer your question, so you'll just have to make do with another player answering it.

Katrina Oniseki