These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Jonas Valence
Subsidy H.R.S.
Xagenic Freymvork
#2341 - 2013-09-05 03:36:33 UTC
Just like to point out, maybe I missed it in the previous posts- the latest iteration.

Kronos, Paladin, Vargur - Marauder skill lvl gives a weapon bonus and an ewar bonus.
Golem - Maraduer skill gives ewar, and ewar.

For me, web on Golem is a useless and will never be used bonus. Why not give the Golem an equal bonus to other hulls.
Some boost to missle performance and the tp bonus, to be inline with the other hulls.

Just a faithful Golem pilot's two-cents.
Cade Windstalker
#2342 - 2013-09-05 03:42:29 UTC
Chainsaw Plankton wrote:
I ... what? the paladin is still probably the marauder that gets the best deal out of this thingy. dat optimal bonus! armor reps just got +15% and will get +100% in bastion still. oh yes and a ton of cap! the thing doesn't need the rep bonus for lv4s as is.

also it can do the same dps as the nightmare, and I think I'll take the optimal bonus over the tracking bonus most of the time. not to mention all that cap (again) and the ability to press a button and get +100% reps!


Except that lasers already have a great range set for missions. The optimal bonus may be good for PvP but on a mission boat a tracking bonus would probably be worth more, especially since it's not stacking penalized.
Patrice Macmahon
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#2343 - 2013-09-05 03:42:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Patrice Macmahon
Chainsaw Plankton wrote:

100% rep bonus, only when sitting still. although considering nearly every self rep mod just got buffed it isn't quite a 37.5% hit. for lv4s most marauders didn't really even need the rep bonus anyways.

ships that didn't really need an 80% web got one, and two ships lost 90% webs for 80%

and yea the mass change isn't anywhere near as bad as some people are making it out to be

should have had a prop mod already, although with base speed and mass nerf you will be going slower.


Lets see if I can give the reading base some clarification about why so many Murader pilots want the web bonus gone for something else... and why we seriously dislike the idea of a "Stationary" gun fortress.

To effectively run missions - we fight at range. Large guns hit with certainty around 30km++ (for Vargur / Paladin) or 35++ For the Kronos. Golem is a wild child and is more interested in sig radius, but gets a painter bonus (which is usefull for that hull). Because of this, most engagement ranges for these Muraders is 30-60km, with the Paladin and Kronos pushing out 80 or more KM for effective DPS.

We prefer to fight at range, and have the ability to do damage at range because it is both faster and safer for mission running. Most Battle Ships primarily Distance Tank. We are able to stay outside of weapons damage range of the NPC rats, and using an AB or MWD we can easily dictate both range and angular velocity to targets to a level of high fidelity, ensuring optimal safety and damage application.


Webs don't go out to 30-35km. - Webs go out to 9km. Expensive Faction webs might go out to 14 km. Even then while webbed, those ships are impossible to hit with large caliber weapons (especially rails / beems ) from inside 15km. Even a 90% web. You have to both Web and fly manually to lower angular velocity to the point of solid hits. If we are stationary, we can no longer kill close up elite cruisers, or blap elite cruisers that orbit at 15-18km.

It is far more effective to fly manually and burn away or in parallel to a group of ships, than sit stationary and try to web them one at a time (each web takes time to slow its target... web fighting is SLOW fighting). So instead of webs, we fit tracking computers, two at a time, with either Range (Hey, we already good at that), or raw tracking (hey we can hit them with manual flying at 30km).

"Why not just fit short ranged weapons"

The time it takes to travel within optimal range, apply damage, destroy target and then fly to the next target.... It's slow. It is significantly faster to gradually burn range (or manipulate speed to maintain range), to apply your 800-1000 dps constantly and instantly to each and every target in sequence. Not to mention the additional safety aspect. I am not constantly within optimal range of each pocket of agro, constantly, every fight. I simply start shooting off the incoming DPS carefully, then turn my repper off and pulse tank as needed.

Its faster and safer to fly manual / dictate range / angular velocity with long range weapon systems, than to rely on a web while brick tanking.

Everyone is screaming for webs for 1 of 2 reasons... Specific Incusion fits (which is a non issue considering how many people bring webs), or PVP (Which is a valid concern. As Webs on a Blaster Kronos / Autocannon Vargur is a high point and potential for this hull).

Major Mission Runners / Sanctum / Haven / Worm Hole Runners Use Dual Tracking Computers or Target Painters (golem). Not webs. That's why we scratch our heads at this compared to the theory crafters.

 "Much of this is crystallised in our philosophy, or as others call it "the Intaki Faith". We simply call it Ida - the literal translation is "to consider", and is a good description of the Intaki." 

Chainsaw Plankton
FaDoyToy
#2344 - 2013-09-05 03:45:15 UTC
Big rEy wrote:
zbaaca wrote:
2 CCP Ytterbium
stop screwing golem . now it become piece of sh*t

True, I've stopped training for one when I read the las post from Ytterbium Straight I will stay with my RNI.


golem looks fine, probably the marauder least affected by the proposed changes, also with the cruise buff it just got better (vargur is a close second but them winmatar resists!).

@ChainsawPlankto on twitter

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2345 - 2013-09-05 03:48:09 UTC
Chainsaw Plankton wrote:
Ravasta Helugo wrote:
Quote:
In L4s you don't need the tank, so just stick with the pirate BS.

That's what I'm going to be forced to do after these changes.

And I don't want to. I love the Paladin. I love the model. I love that it's going to transform into a cool battlestation thingy now. But if it sucks, and it will suck for missioning compared to any number of other ships, then I won't fly it.



I ... what? the paladin is still probably the marauder that gets the best deal out of this thingy. dat optimal bonus! armor reps just got +15% and will get +100% in bastion still. oh yes and a ton of cap! the thing doesn't need the rep bonus for lv4s as is.

also it can do the same dps as the nightmare, and I think I'll take the optimal bonus over the tracking bonus most of the time. not to mention all that cap (again) and the ability to press a button and get +100% reps!

All armor reps getting +15% means the paladin doesn't stand out there though. Agreed on the range vs tracking, and bastion adds a nice option, but it will be slower, moreso under prop mods due to mass difference, have less drone flexibility and probably less tank after fitting aside from bastion focused tanks.

Which is my issue, the ships are going the direction of being prenerfed to keep bastion from being OP, and personally, I wanted to be an option, not something mandatory to keep it from being inferior for solo work. For incursions I'm not sure where it stands, web nerf seems compensated for by the more omni friendly resist profile.
Xequecal
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#2346 - 2013-09-05 03:49:23 UTC
ITT: Terrible terrible players that complain they need a tank bonus on top of a 100% rep bonus to run L 4s.

Also, ridiculous hyperbole asking CCP to change nothing rather than do this, as if range, resist, scan res, tank and we immunity bonuses are worse to have than 15% ehp and speed.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2347 - 2013-09-05 03:51:51 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Chainsaw Plankton wrote:
I ... what? the paladin is still probably the marauder that gets the best deal out of this thingy. dat optimal bonus! armor reps just got +15% and will get +100% in bastion still. oh yes and a ton of cap! the thing doesn't need the rep bonus for lv4s as is.

also it can do the same dps as the nightmare, and I think I'll take the optimal bonus over the tracking bonus most of the time. not to mention all that cap (again) and the ability to press a button and get +100% reps!


Except that lasers already have a great range set for missions. The optimal bonus may be good for PvP but on a mission boat a tracking bonus would probably be worth more, especially since it's not stacking penalized.

With the focus seeming to shift from Bastion optional to Bastion+MJD mandatory I'd argue that range would be highly prized. Blinking out 100km on a megapulse+scorch boat and still being viable is one of my hopes that remain intact at this point.
Chainsaw Plankton
FaDoyToy
#2348 - 2013-09-05 03:53:02 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
All armor reps getting +15% means the paladin doesn't stand out there though. Agreed on the range vs tracking, and bastion adds a nice option, but it will be slower, moreso under prop mods due to mass difference, have less drone flexibility and probably less tank after fitting aside from bastion focused tanks.

Which is my issue, the ships are going the direction of being prenerfed to keep bastion from being OP, and personally, I wanted to be an option, not something mandatory to keep it from being inferior for solo work. For incursions I'm not sure where it stands, web nerf seems compensated for by the more omni friendly resist profile.


it doesn't need to stand out on tank with an optimal range and damage bonus on tachyons.

@ChainsawPlankto on twitter

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2349 - 2013-09-05 03:54:58 UTC
Xequecal wrote:
ITT: Terrible terrible players that complain they need a tank bonus on top of a 100% rep bonus to run L 4s.

Also, ridiculous hyperbole asking CCP to change nothing rather than do this, as if range, resist, scan res, tank and we immunity bonuses are worse to have than 15% ehp and speed.

So basically the marauder should be defined by the bastion capabilities rather than stand on their own with bastion being a situationally viable benefit?
Chainsaw Plankton
FaDoyToy
#2350 - 2013-09-05 03:57:00 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Chainsaw Plankton wrote:
I ... what? the paladin is still probably the marauder that gets the best deal out of this thingy. dat optimal bonus! armor reps just got +15% and will get +100% in bastion still. oh yes and a ton of cap! the thing doesn't need the rep bonus for lv4s as is.

also it can do the same dps as the nightmare, and I think I'll take the optimal bonus over the tracking bonus most of the time. not to mention all that cap (again) and the ability to press a button and get +100% reps!


Except that lasers already have a great range set for missions. The optimal bonus may be good for PvP but on a mission boat a tracking bonus would probably be worth more, especially since it's not stacking penalized.

With the focus seeming to shift from Bastion optional to Bastion+MJD mandatory I'd argue that range would be highly prized. Blinking out 100km on a megapulse+scorch boat and still being viable is one of my hopes that remain intact at this point.


From a tachyon gamma will just shoot just a bit shorter than scorch and do more dps, xray will do slightly less dps and out range scorch.

neither the bastion mod or the MJD will be needed for a paladin. although it is nice the 25% optimal from bastion will be the biggest optimal bonus so it goes first in the stacking penalty formula.

@ChainsawPlankto on twitter

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2351 - 2013-09-05 03:57:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyberius Franklin
Chainsaw Plankton wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
All armor reps getting +15% means the paladin doesn't stand out there though. Agreed on the range vs tracking, and bastion adds a nice option, but it will be slower, moreso under prop mods due to mass difference, have less drone flexibility and probably less tank after fitting aside from bastion focused tanks.

Which is my issue, the ships are going the direction of being prenerfed to keep bastion from being OP, and personally, I wanted to be an option, not something mandatory to keep it from being inferior for solo work. For incursions I'm not sure where it stands, web nerf seems compensated for by the more omni friendly resist profile.


it doesn't need to stand out on tank with an optimal range and damage bonus on tachyons.

The nightmare has the damage bonus as well. Range on the hull seems negated by inferior mobility. These are concerns purely related to outside of Bastion abilities.
Chainsaw Plankton wrote:

From a tachyon gamma will just shoot just a bit shorter than scorch and do more dps, xray will do slightly less dps and out range scorch.

neither the bastion mod or the MJD will be needed for a paladin. although it is nice the 25% optimal from bastion will be the biggest optimal bonus so it goes first in the stacking penalty formula.

Had trouble fitting tach's and being happy with the fit in the past, though the increased fitting could well change that. We'll see. Though I wonder if I'll miss the tracking.
Patrice Macmahon
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#2352 - 2013-09-05 03:57:50 UTC
Xequecal wrote:
ITT: Terrible terrible players that complain they need a tank bonus on top of a 100% rep bonus to run L 4s.

Also, ridiculous hyperbole asking CCP to change nothing rather than do this, as if range, resist, scan res, tank and we immunity bonuses are worse to have than 15% ehp and speed.



100% bonus to brick tanking. Which means we can no longer dictate range. The immobile aspect of the siege module is a NERF to a muraders primary defense and damage application system - It's long range.


Forcing us to sit mobile while tanking a while room of agro in order to survive a nasty pocket = slower mission times. Why? We can't dictacte angular velocity or range on our target anymore.

If we are inside or outside the pre-designed orbital of the rat in question, they fly directly away from us or towards us, dopping their angular, allowing us to shoot them for full damage.

Forcing us to sit still to manage incoming damage (brick tanking), severely lowers our DPS output. It's a NERF in DPS in regards to how effective mission running is generally handled.

 "Much of this is crystallised in our philosophy, or as others call it "the Intaki Faith". We simply call it Ida - the literal translation is "to consider", and is a good description of the Intaki." 

Chainsaw Plankton
FaDoyToy
#2353 - 2013-09-05 03:58:56 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Chainsaw Plankton wrote:
I ... what? the paladin is still probably the marauder that gets the best deal out of this thingy. dat optimal bonus! armor reps just got +15% and will get +100% in bastion still. oh yes and a ton of cap! the thing doesn't need the rep bonus for lv4s as is.

also it can do the same dps as the nightmare, and I think I'll take the optimal bonus over the tracking bonus most of the time. not to mention all that cap (again) and the ability to press a button and get +100% reps!


Except that lasers already have a great range set for missions. The optimal bonus may be good for PvP but on a mission boat a tracking bonus would probably be worth more, especially since it's not stacking penalized.


oh comeon! 65-70km optimal with multi, that's just kick ass!

@ChainsawPlankto on twitter

Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#2354 - 2013-09-05 04:00:45 UTC
Ravasta Helugo wrote:
I hope this chorus against the 7.5% rep nerf reaches the Dev's ears with the same clarity that the Incursion whiners did.

The original proposed changes were 90% of what was necessary. But I would rather you do nothing than do what is currently proposed.

It is not just the 7.5% rep bonus per level, the t2 resist profile makes them good for rat specific tanking, just like command ships, heavy assault cruisers, T3s, and assault frigates it would seem we have plenty of ships for rat specific tanking.
The first iteration of the marauder's bastion module was nice because it basically said "to hell with rat specific tanking" and let you run any kind of site or mission you wanted.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

Chainsaw Plankton
FaDoyToy
#2355 - 2013-09-05 04:03:25 UTC
Patrice Macmahon wrote:
Chainsaw Plankton wrote:

100% rep bonus, only when sitting still. although considering nearly every self rep mod just got buffed it isn't quite a 37.5% hit. for lv4s most marauders didn't really even need the rep bonus anyways.

ships that didn't really need an 80% web got one, and two ships lost 90% webs for 80%

and yea the mass change isn't anywhere near as bad as some people are making it out to be

should have had a prop mod already, although with base speed and mass nerf you will be going slower.


Lets see if I can give the reading base some clarification about why so many Murader pilots want the web bonus gone for something else... and why we seriously dislike the idea of a "Stationary" gun fortress.

To effectively run missions - we fight at range. Large guns hit with certainty around 30km++ (for Vargur / Paladin) or 35++ For the Kronos. Golem is a wild child and is more interested in sig radius, but gets a painter bonus (which is usefull for that hull). Because of this, most engagement ranges for these Muraders is 30-60km, with the Paladin and Kronos pushing out 80 or more KM for effective DPS.

We prefer to fight at range, and have the ability to do damage at range because it is both faster and safer for mission running. Most Battle Ships primarily Distance Tank. We are able to stay outside of weapons damage range of the NPC rats, and using an AB or MWD we can easily dictate both range and angular velocity to targets to a level of high fidelity, ensuring optimal safety and damage application.


the web bonus is very good in some situations and I don't think it really detracts from anything else the hulls do.

and that is more or less how I have flown my marauder since I got it not too long after they got released. Only I'd rather say I gank tank than range tank. a ~300 dps tank is sufficient for any lv4 that I've run. having the range is just a bonus as I can start most engagements using high damage ammo instead of swapping.

and to nitpick the kronos and paladin are effective at mostly the same ranges, and the vargur probably wants to be a bit closer (which is fine as angels can't really hit for crap)

@ChainsawPlankto on twitter

Chainsaw Plankton
FaDoyToy
#2356 - 2013-09-05 04:06:50 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Ravasta Helugo wrote:
I hope this chorus against the 7.5% rep nerf reaches the Dev's ears with the same clarity that the Incursion whiners did.

The original proposed changes were 90% of what was necessary. But I would rather you do nothing than do what is currently proposed.

It is not just the 7.5% rep bonus per level, the t2 resist profile makes them good for rat specific tanking, just like command ships, heavy assault cruisers, T3s, and assault frigates it would seem we have plenty of ships for rat specific tanking.
The first iteration of the marauder's bastion module was nice because it basically said "to hell with rat specific tanking" and let you run any kind of site or mission you wanted.


who doesn't love fighting angels with their amarr t2 ships!?


but anyways the bastion module seems compelling at this point with most of the bonuses going right into the hull. I'll probably fit one anyways just cuz nothing else to really put in an 8th high on a marauder, and every now and then I can see it being useful.

oh and I'm still rooting for a 200% tractor bonus. after using a noctis the marauder tractors stink!

@ChainsawPlankto on twitter

Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#2357 - 2013-09-05 04:07:52 UTC
Certainly the conclusion seems to strongly be that webs are the wrong module to be associated with this ship by a long way.
Perhaps look at a more appropriate bonus for a stationary/slow moving ship? That is either never going to get into web range or is still not going to be able to hit it's target.
Smart bomb range would be a very unique bonus (if not usable in High sec due to concord risks) which would be usable. Point range so you can keep point even while they burn away from your 0m/s BS. Two easy options at least. And both PvP related uses.
Zoe Israfil
#2358 - 2013-09-05 04:08:38 UTC
I would simply like to point out proposed changes to tank. As a solo boat I strongly believe that these ships should be quite self reliant.

Assumptions:

For comparison I am using a current vargur resist profile + 30% resist bastion module +37.5% rep bonus +100% bastion rep bonus as Ship A.

Ship B consists of an imaginary vargur with T2 resists, no ship rep bonus, no bastion resist bonus, and a +100% bastion rep bonus.

The "Rep module" is an imaginary 1000 hp /5 second shield booster. I am doing math by hand so I picked nice numbers, also please check the math as it's possible I've made a mistake.

Ship A:

Resist Profile:

25
50
40
30

Resist w/Bastion:

47.5
65
58
51
(no stacking pen per OP original specs)

AVG: 55.375

1000 *1.375 HP / 5 Secs = 275 hp / sec

= EHP Rep bonus of 616.246 ehp/ sec

+100% bastion module = 1232.49 ehp/ sec

___________________________________

Ship B:

Resist Profile:

75
50
40
60

(no change due to bastion)

AVG: 56.25

1000*1 HP / 5 Seconds = 200 Hp / sec

= EHP Rep bonus of 457.18 ehp/sec

+100% Bastion module = 914.286 ehp/ sec
_____________________________________

Therefore as this stands the new changes reduce local tank by ~ 25.8%!!!! That is a huge nerf.

25.8%

To address some previous posters:

No, you don't need a huge tank in level 4's, but you do in many OTHER areas of the game. Before this change they were small gang pvp viable, they were anom viable, they were very very interesting and I was extremely excited to see just how far this type of ship could be pushed. These ships have typically been the GodKingEmporor of solo/single account play. It is my strong opinion that they retain this title and therefore their local tank bonuses. It allows for a much wider range of game play with these ships. As I see it these changes have been enacted to make bastions fleet viable. They are still not fleet viable (at least with bastion mode) and without bastion mode they lose whatever specialty/nice edge they might have ever had. This is like CCP saying you can now have a fleet viable dred, just you can not siege it. Except on these ships they get better at hitting other pvp ships instead of worse. This is a terrible, terrible change in my opinion. I was so super excited about these ships, now they seem to have lost most of their allure. They truly do seem to only be fit for incursions/ lvl 4's as they sit. Please strongly reconsider the most recent iteration CCP, I do not approve.

Feel free to check the math as it was done quickly and angrily by hand. It is also late, but those numbers should be quite close to accurate as they are.
yodayblack
AirHogs
Hogs Collective
#2359 - 2013-09-05 04:15:32 UTC
WHY!!!!!!!!

Really.. why.. this is so insane i keep checking the calendar to make sure it isnt April. You want to take away our tanking bonus to give us back our web bonus, at a nerf'd rate? Why does a golem need a web bonus anyway? At first the changes where bearable. Annoying, requiring a completely new fitting idea. Now.. this is just plain stupid.

Also how is this going to help in pvp? You want them to jump away and go into a siege mode.. Then use range weapons and range ammo so a maxxed skilled kronos pilot is going to add what 300 dps in a pvp fight? Lulz yeah lets bring a 1.2 billion isk ship into a fight and add 300dps. I can get that in a **** fit demios for 1/4 the price. or out dps it in a t1 rail fit naga for even less.

These ships were created to run mission. The only thing your doing is making more people switch to pirate ships and leave these in the hangar.. These updates wont make them viable in pvp, just makes them less viable for missions.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#2360 - 2013-09-05 04:18:11 UTC
Zoe Israfil wrote:
Snip

Now redo the maths for situation A using a 0% Bastion module. You are trying to combine the effect of two changes at once here. One of which was not currently in game and was only in initial proposal stage. So using two different bastion module proposals to argue a single stat change doesn't work.
The T2 resist profile is to compensate for the Rep bonus being lost. Not for both bonuses. And you get another bonus alongside the T2 resists as a result (Currently Webs, and the ships that used to have a web bonus get a different bonus instead if you want to look at it that way)