These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kane Fenris
NWP
#2841 - 2013-09-06 11:30:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Kane Fenris
Aeronite wrote:
Web bonus for golem is a joke since the ship will never get in range to web anything kinda like the curent paladin.Give it another bonus any bonus just not web


+1

but even for the others its a often useless bonus esp if its velocity not range

[edit]
esp. a shield tanked ship with web and tp bounus so what should it fit in the mids?

mjd (maybe ab too) tp web cap booster and tank?
Rayzilla Zaraki
Yin Jian Enterprises
#2842 - 2013-09-06 12:01:15 UTC
While I like the idea, somehow having something that can fix itself in space doesn't seem very Maraudery.

When one marauds, one is roaming in search of plunder or prey. That is the aspect that should be looked at.

Gate campers are just Carebears with anger issues.
Cade Windstalker
#2843 - 2013-09-06 12:06:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Cade Windstalker
CanI haveyourstuff wrote:

2. NO **** really? thats why im proposing marauder bonus if MJD fitted then MJD immune to scram's.

+2 str is just too OP.


Actually I believe Scrams shut off your MWD or MJD whether you can warp or not.

To mare wrote:
5th turret/launcher (as fittings to go with)
Tech1 BS sensor strenght
T2 resist

dont touch anything else.


marauders are fixed and useful.


why the **** CCP have to complicate things when is so simple?


Because this would mean that the Kronos out-DPSes the Vindicator as well as out-tanking them.

This is power-creep of the worst sort.

Skia Aumer wrote:
I'm really concerned about adding more arbitrary timers into the game.

Bastion mode is fixed at 60 seconds. Why 60? Not 58, or 144?

Furthermore, it is not affected by ship type (race), stats, fitting, pilot skillpoints and RL skills. Who needs those fitting options like nanos and inertstabs? Doesnt matter if you watch local for neuts, because it only depends on luck - either you're near the end of your siege or in the beginning.

Also, CCP - nerf the sentry drone carriers. Because they are way superior to anything you're suggesting.


Actually I tested earlier and it's ~30 seconds to warp 3AU to a star without factoring in align time. Unless someone already knows your exact location and is within ~30AU of you then it's highly unlikely that you could be caught in Bastion.

Even if they pop into local the moment you start a cycle you're looking at ~5 seconds to align, anywhere between 5 and ~30 seconds to probe you down, and another 30+ seconds warping to you. Even with a 12 second align time you have plenty of time to GTFO back to a station, POS, or bail to a safe spot until you can safe-logout.

Kagura Nikon wrote:

A good PVP ship will be a good PVE ship as long as its role on PVP is brute force oriented. So there is nothign wrong...

In fact what is wrong is the ABSURD idea of focusing an ICONIC spot as of the T2 battleship for a PVE ONLY ship.

In fact Pirate battleships are more PVE capable than the marauders! So there is not evne need for Marauders to keep a PVE orientation. They should be made into Strong T2 Combat ships, oriented to some sort of vbrute force ( as in the bastion model supports) so that they can be used on PVE AND PVP.


Hence why I listed Marauders a "Defense/PvE". They can be tanky without dealing as much damage as Pirate Battleships and still have uses, especially when supported by logistics.

What they should not be is flat better than the Pirate Battleships or gain PvP ability at the expense of their PvE viability. Not everything that makes a good PvP ship makes for a good PvE ship.

Rayzilla Zaraki wrote:
While I like the idea, somehow having something that can fix itself in space doesn't seem very Maraudery.

When one marauds, one is roaming in search of plunder or prey. That is the aspect that should be looked at.


This is a fallacy. Any ship in the game can "maraud" under the proper definition. Balancing because of how something is named is silly. Names can be easily changed, balancing based on the definition of a word makes for a poor game (unless it's Scribblenauts but this isn't that) and can be very hard to fix later.
HolidayDerp derf
Lazerhawks
L A Z E R H A W K S
#2844 - 2013-09-06 12:16:32 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
HolidayDerp derf wrote:
Game Breaking
ASB = 2k hp/cycle
add 100%bonus and crystals as well as a booster and you can get 4k-6k hp/cycle



You mean as in you need to risk gettign to 10% of your shield before activate the repair or you will waste half of your repair cycle? NOT SO OP.....


NUmber crunshing is not same as in game.


you forgot waiting to 10% shields then BOOM!!! 100% shields
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#2845 - 2013-09-06 12:20:49 UTC
HolidayDerp derf wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
HolidayDerp derf wrote:
Game Breaking
ASB = 2k hp/cycle
add 100%bonus and crystals as well as a booster and you can get 4k-6k hp/cycle



You mean as in you need to risk gettign to 10% of your shield before activate the repair or you will waste half of your repair cycle? NOT SO OP.....


NUmber crunshing is not same as in game.


you forgot waiting to 10% shields then BOOM!!! 100% shields


While it's okay for ASBs with their fast reaction time, imagine the problematics for armor reps, boosting 5k/AAR cycle, many seconds delayed. Try to time that well!
HolidayDerp derf
Lazerhawks
L A Z E R H A W K S
#2846 - 2013-09-06 12:30:13 UTC
Lloyd Roses wrote:
HolidayDerp derf wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
HolidayDerp derf wrote:
Game Breaking
ASB = 2k hp/cycle
add 100%bonus and crystals as well as a booster and you can get 4k-6k hp/cycle



You mean as in you need to risk gettign to 10% of your shield before activate the repair or you will waste half of your repair cycle? NOT SO OP.....


NUmber crunshing is not same as in game.


you forgot waiting to 10% shields then BOOM!!! 100% shields


While it's okay for ASBs with their fast reaction time, imagine the problematics for armor reps, boosting 5k/AAR cycle, many seconds delayed. Try to time that well!


im really biased with the hatred of asb because from the begining it appeared as a broken mechanic, so much hp for no cap and no down side.I do not know enough about AAR to hate it yet but i suport it more because at least ccp tried to even armor out a little with shields.

i feel they should restrict the bonus to regular shield boosters/armor repairs
The Spod
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#2847 - 2013-09-06 12:30:51 UTC
Faceroll marauders with target breaker could be ridiculously overpowered in fleet engagements.

With t2 resists 400k ehp could be standard while breaking all lock queues and target priorities on the fleet constantly. The damage application and target spectrum harass with the buffer looks untouchable to any other doctrine than sentry fleets as far as subcaps go. This all while being EWAR immune.

When enemy fleet is roflstomped and diminished, just unsiege and rep up with your RR chain. Alternately use dual ancillary tank to keep your buffer topped; with the target breaking, ehp and damage projection you'll stomp subcap fleets 10 to 1 kill ratio so who needs logistics.

To make matters worse you can do this while MJD kiting and sniping with superior projection.
The only counter seems to be dronefleets and caps. Oh right, you bring caps only when you have subcap dominance :)
POWER CREEP.
Viscount Hood
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#2848 - 2013-09-06 12:32:22 UTC
as above. web bonus for the Golem is wasted. shield bonus is much better. Don't destroy its lovely shield bonus. Evil

How about a 25% bonus to web range per level instead.
Tarmaniel
State War Academy
Caldari State
#2849 - 2013-09-06 12:37:12 UTC
The Spod wrote:
Faceroll marauders with target breaker could be ridiculously overpowered in fleet engagements.

With t2 resists 400k ehp could be standard while breaking all lock queues and target priorities on the fleet constantly. The damage application and target spectrum harass with the buffer looks untouchable to any other doctrine than sentry fleets as far as subcaps go. This all while being EWAR immune.

When enemy fleet is roflstomped and diminished, just unsiege and rep up with your RR chain. Alternately use dual ancillary tank to keep your buffer topped; with the target breaking, ehp and damage projection you'll stomp subcap fleets 10 to 1 kill ratio so who needs logistics.

To make matters worse you can do this while MJD kiting and sniping with superior projection.
The only counter seems to be dronefleets and caps. Oh right, you bring caps only when you have subcap dominance :)
POWER CREEP.


You're never going to see large-scale fleet engagements with Marauders no matter what changes they make. You're never going to find even 200 pilots who both all have the same racial marauder type and guns trained in addition to all being logged in at the same time. Even if you did find that many pilots and got a 10-to-1 kill ratio, the 10 guys on your side that did get killed are now out of it for at least a week while they farm up another marauder.
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#2850 - 2013-09-06 12:39:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Rroff
Rayzilla Zaraki wrote:
While I like the idea, somehow having something that can fix itself in space doesn't seem very Maraudery.

When one marauds, one is roaming in search of plunder or prey. That is the aspect that should be looked at.



I get the feeling Marauders was just a fancy name slapped on a line of ships :S and their actual function has little to do with Marauding otherwise you'd get something like this (ish):

Innate bonus to over-heating of some sort, possibly with some tweaks to make it (more) relevant to PVE.

Defensive sub-systems:

-Big active tank, sig reduction bonuses
-Medium active tank bonus, cargo/salvaging, etc. inustry related bonuses
-Small buffer bonus and full T2 resists

Electronics:

-Higher sensor strength and other sensor bonuses, lower ewar bonus or maybe ewar replaced with tracking/optimal/falloff bonus (Not a fan of gunnery bonuses on electronics sub-systems but it would kind of fit with the compromise to ewar).
-Something in between
-Higher ewar bonus, lower sensor strength
(Some mix of PVE i.e. tractor beam bonuses in there somewhere)

Engineering:

Normal kind of fitting/capacitor compromises and one that supplements the overheating bonus

Offensive:

Some configuration options on drone capabilities and turret/missile damage output

Propulsion sub-systems:

-MJD bonus sub-system
-AB bonus - probably fairly large bonus to speed (upto ~75% of normal MWD speed on these ships)
-Jump drive sub-system - quite limited but used to "get behind enemy lines" and to get out of trouble but very limited range - literally only able to jump 1-2 systems over (might be a bit tricky to balance with the varied range between systems) its not designed for deep insertion or hot dropping like black ops.


IMO something along those lines is needed to make a true marauder but I'm increasingly getting the impression the name as used ingame is misleading and not what what we are actually talking about.
Siddicus
Nation of Sidd
#2851 - 2013-09-06 12:41:03 UTC
Tarmaniel wrote:

You're never going to see large-scale fleet engagements with Marauders no matter what changes they make. You're never going to find even 200 pilots who both all have the same racial marauder type and guns trained in addition to all being logged in at the same time. Even if you did find that many pilots and got a 10-to-1 kill ratio, the 10 guys on your side that did get killed are now out of it for at least a week while they farm up another marauder.


That sounds vaguely familiar with what was said about Titans when they were introduced and how they would be so expensive that even the largest alliances would only have a couple, but now look where we are.
Debora Tsung
Perkone
Caldari State
#2852 - 2013-09-06 12:47:08 UTC
Siddicus wrote:
That sounds vaguely familiar with what was said about Titans when they were introduced and how they would be so expensive that even the largest alliances would only have a couple, but now look where we are.


To be fair, the largest alliances are really large... Straight

And I dare say that if titans hadn't been so immensely oberpowered when they were first introduced there wouldn't be as many around, no?

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.
Lair Osen
#2853 - 2013-09-06 13:03:04 UTC
HolidayDerp derf wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
HolidayDerp derf wrote:
Game Breaking
ASB = 2k hp/cycle
add 100%bonus and crystals as well as a booster and you can get 4k-6k hp/cycle



You mean as in you need to risk gettign to 10% of your shield before activate the repair or you will waste half of your repair cycle? NOT SO OP.....


NUmber crunshing is not same as in game.


you forgot waiting to 10% shields then BOOM!!! 100% shields


XLASB + PithX SBA + Crystals + Strong Blue Pill + 100% Bastion Bonus
= 5676hp per cycle
= 60.5% of 9375 shields (assuming booster no side effect) + really pissed of opponent
= 51084hp in XLASB (9 Navy 400 Charges)

Now just hope the devs don't read this and decide to get the nerf bat out again.

Now bring that 7.5% Shield Rep Bonus (so +30% shield rep @ lvl4) back because I can't afford all that expensive stuff (and don't want a giant target on my head), and won't be risking the Drug Side effects (so -30% shield rep).
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#2854 - 2013-09-06 13:23:56 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Time for another update.

We discussed the Marauder situation further and came with the following changes:


  • Shield, armor and hull 30% resistance boosts have been removed on the Bastion Module - instead, all Marauders will now get proper tech2 resists. This will allow Marauders to have better RR use outside Bastion and reduce overall tanking effectiveness inside the mode.

  • We have removed all tanking bonuses on the Marauders hulls (Armor Repairer amount on the Paladin and Kronos, Shield Boost amount on the Golem and Vargur). Instead, we are giving them 7.5% bonus to the velocity factor of stasis webifiers per level. This will not only help reducing their tanking effectiveness, be more in theme with the ship role itself and help anyone using them with short range weapons. We are not giving them a full 10% per level back as this would be extremely powerful in conjunction with the other bonuses / Bastion. We are going to leave the full 10% web strength amount on the Serpentis ships for now and see how things evolve with time.

  • Also, we are removing the mass penalty on the Bastion mode. Tests have shown you can't really turn when it's active anyway, and we don't want to have players abuse that to collapse wormholes.


I will change the OP to match the changes.


Heh. CCP gives, CCP takes. Roll

Quote:
they become fixed weapon placement with a bonus to resistances, tanking, damage projection and receiving EW immunity.


So what's the use of the bastion module now? Just a few more range and EW inmunity? Thank you for nothing from a mission runner and Golem pilot...

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you
Lair Osen
#2855 - 2013-09-06 13:28:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Lair Osen
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:

So what's the use of the bastion module now? Just a few more range and EW inmunity? Thank you for nothing from a mission runner and Golem pilot...


Bastion 100% Rep Bonus...
The Spod
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#2856 - 2013-09-06 13:28:58 UTC  |  Edited by: The Spod
Why this marauder idea is bad:

• capitals are brought on field if subcap fight looks favorable
• t2 buffer marauders roflstomp all other subcap fleets (possibly even worse with target spectrum breakers putting the EHP into good use)
• only bang for buck counter is dronefleet


What could be done about it:

• Make the bastion a siege mode with guns gaining double rate of fire but hopping tracking and resolution to dread levels. This would -make marauders an anti-capital power creep mechanism. The bastion mode would only hit structures and capships, for subcaps you use them like normal BS.
• Cut the t2 resist crap and roll bonus into bastion which now won't work against subcaps.
• Cut the ewar immunity crap.
• Cut the MJD crap.

Now you have a specialized (t2) anti-capital subcap. Not a "lets do 7 different things and be best at each specialized". The price is high and vulnerability too to make them less powerful vs. subcaps because you can't blink around every minute or fit half million ehp buffer. Counter power creep of capitals.
Debora Tsung
Perkone
Caldari State
#2857 - 2013-09-06 13:34:13 UTC
Lair Osen wrote:
Bastion 100% Rep Bonus...


+1 for paying attention.

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.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#2858 - 2013-09-06 13:35:21 UTC
HolidayDerp derf wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
HolidayDerp derf wrote:
Game Breaking
ASB = 2k hp/cycle
add 100%bonus and crystals as well as a booster and you can get 4k-6k hp/cycle



You mean as in you need to risk gettign to 10% of your shield before activate the repair or you will waste half of your repair cycle? NOT SO OP.....


NUmber crunshing is not same as in game.


you forgot waiting to 10% shields then BOOM!!! 100% shields


That can very easily go wrong.. as in 10% shield then BOOM you are dead because a single alpha strike kileld you sicne you were forced to brign your effective HP very low in oder to make you of max power of your repair.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#2859 - 2013-09-06 13:41:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Rroff
The Spod wrote:
Why this marauder idea is bad:

• capitals are brought on field if subcap fight looks favorable
• t2 buffer marauders roflstomp all other subcap fleets (possibly even worse with target spectrum breakers putting the EHP into good use)
• only bang for buck counter is dronefleet


What could be done about it:

Make the bastion a siege mode with guns gaining double rate of fire but hopping tracking and resolution to dread levels. This would make marauders an anti-capital power creep mechanism. The bastion mode would only hit structures and capships, for subcaps you use them like normal BS. Cut the t2 resist crap and roll bonus into bastion which now won't work against subcaps. Cut the ewar immunity crap. Keep the damage projection bonus in hull stats to make them decent for pve. Cut the MJD crap.


They'd still die ridiculously fast against dreads tho - from the logfile of taking down a POCO recently:

78142 - Penetrates
121413 - Smashes
70811 - Penetrates
97167 - Smashes
102970 - Smashes
73963 - Penetrates

And thats a fairly typical example of any section of the log - even factoring in resists very little sub-capital thats sitting dead still will survive against that let alone against 2 or more dreads and that wasn't even a gank fit moros.
Captain Semper
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Pandemic Horde
#2860 - 2013-09-06 13:42:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Captain Semper
Kagura Nikon wrote:


That can very easily go wrong.. as in 10% shield then BOOM you are dead because a single alpha strike kileld you sicne you were forced to brign your effective HP very low in oder to make you of max power of your repair.

This why armor reps need new mechanic. For example constant heal when armor rep ON. Not a chunk of hp at the end of cycle. Just constantly repair.