These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#3201 - 2013-09-08 16:00:42 UTC
Shantetha wrote:


Leave RR in and lets see how it gets used if it's op and everyone starts using it with local and remote reps then put in a negative remote rep modifier.



That is how you get blapped to do lack of buffer
CanI haveyourstuff
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#3202 - 2013-09-08 16:04:39 UTC  |  Edited by: CanI haveyourstuff
Wedgetail wrote:
if you don't care then why ask? and you yourself professing to having such experience and not sharing? It would seem you've reached the limits of your patience or knowledge or both? you won't be able to discredit my view by simply stating your dislike for my background, you'll need more of an effort than that - but i'll understand if you're not willing to exert the effort required.


nice words aligned up one after another... tons of jibrish.

take kronos and vindi - put them next to eachother, compare bonuses/slots/numbers
if you make out that vindi is t1.5 compared to it then uhmm... good luck.

I dont care about your achievements and whatnot... and I asked because I hoped that you will at least be arsed enough to open attribute windows for different pirate bs and marauders - maybe you'd understand the point yourself. Nothing more.

this situation is not like "i have an opinion and I think that this is better" it's just facts.

but on the matter of proposed changes - your opinions are welcome and appreciated ofcourse.

DSpite Culhach wrote:
Rexxorr wrote:
Tractor beam bonus plz :-) does not have to be as good as noctis, but a bit better.

Hmm pvp, how about this as a suggestion:
Modules takes 50% less damage when over heated in bastion mode.


It would actually seem kinda more logical if Marauders actually had something that allowed far longer overheating, it would make more sense then Bastion mode, to me, at least.


I like that idea alot.

Bastion "like" module which transforms ship to allow extreme cooling of modules.

overheated weapons, utility, speed etc. and there - we have T2 bs worth using.
But for pvp... still dunno, they need some more bonuses to justify 1bil + price.
Detes cald
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#3203 - 2013-09-08 16:12:21 UTC
It seems good changes and the bastion could be some help!!
but as i see at golem at least 7 mids means 5 left for tanking since the other 2 will be target paint and webber meaning 1 active booster !!! and whey removing the shield boosting bonus ?

why taking the drone bay you could only hit the bandwith!!

Oh well most ppl seems that they have told you so !!
Lair Osen
#3204 - 2013-09-08 16:46:30 UTC
And the threadnaught of the week prize goes to... CCP Yitterbium
What has he won?
Well folks, he's won an all-expenses-paid trip... back to the drawing board.
Hopefully he'll have a nice peaceful time of contemplation there.
Dave Stark
#3205 - 2013-09-08 16:57:58 UTC
Lair Osen wrote:
Well folks, he's won an all-expenses-paid trip... back to the drawing board.


that's probably the best place to continue the marauder rebalance from.

it's clear that with the current proposal CCP have no idea what they want marauders to do.
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#3206 - 2013-09-08 17:05:25 UTC
This is my third post on the topic, so I'm going to sound like a broken record, but

1) Does anyone think the 5% cap bonus on Amarr Battleships for the Paladin is useful or should stay?

2) Can anyone think of why the Paladin should only have three bonuses?

And if you don't like it, and haven't said so, can you say so now?
Mer88
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#3207 - 2013-09-08 17:11:16 UTC
I think the problem witth marauder is that ccp wants to make this super expensive ship pvp and pve capable. For having only 2 slots for rigs, most people will use T2 rigs that means the hull plus rigs alone will cost about 1.5 B . To risk a 1.5b bs in pvp people expect it to do alot because when it comes to pvp, people expect a certain amount of performance per isk spent. But in reality a navy BS is just as capable if not better than a marauder in pvp but cost only 1/3 or less.

if you consider marauder a pvp ship, it will never perform well when you consider how much isk/ time you have to spend on the ship so I think ccp should come out and say that marauder is only for pve that way the ships role is more defined and all the ideas should be how to balance this ship in terms of pve and survive from ganks in hostile environment. Lets face it, low ehp, low sensor strength, high cargo bay capacity, tractor beams.....that all pve .
Shantetha
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#3208 - 2013-09-08 17:21:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Shantetha
Benny Ohu wrote:
This is my third post on the topic, so I'm going to sound like a broken record, but

1) Does anyone think the 5% cap bonus on Amarr Battleships for the Paladin is useful or should stay?

2) Can anyone think of why the Paladin should only have three bonuses?

And if you don't like it, and haven't said so, can you say so now?


1) 5% cap bonus / lvl should just be baked into the hull give a dps bonus instead. This is kinda duh at this point, which is prob why people haven't answered you.

2.) Might have originally be to counter the 1 sec crystal ammo changes that lasers can do. But no they should have 4 real bonuses like the other three marauders not 3 and " you will like a side of cap bonus with your armor repper?".
Ravasta Helugo
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#3209 - 2013-09-08 17:24:56 UTC
Shantetha wrote:
Benny Ohu wrote:
This is my third post on the topic, so I'm going to sound like a broken record, but

1) Does anyone think the 5% cap bonus on Amarr Battleships for the Paladin is useful or should stay?

2) Can anyone think of why the Paladin should only have three bonuses?

And if you don't like it, and haven't said so, can you say so now?


1) 5% cap bonus / lvl should just be baked into the hull give a dps bonus instead. This is kinda duh at this point, which is prob why people haven't answered you.

2.) Might have originally be to counter the 1 sec crystal ammo changes that lasers can do. But no they should have 4 real bonuses like the other three marauders not 3 and " you will like a side of cap bonus with your armor repper?".

The 1 sec crystal ammo change is offset by the fact that lasers can only deal EM/Therm damage.
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#3210 - 2013-09-08 17:36:08 UTC
Shantetha wrote:
This is kinda duh at this point, which is prob why people haven't answered you.

yeah. this is why i'm trying to get more people to say "this is bad", because i don't believe anyone could possibly think this bonus is any good.

but there's not much talk of it, which makes it seem like a minor issue.

i'd like everyone who doesn't like it to say so, to make it very clear how bad this bonus is
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#3211 - 2013-09-08 17:48:29 UTC
161 pages of "rubixcube" effect.

Soon ™ we'll get another version closer to the real "plan" and the second part of this threadnaught will continue.

Keep the good stuff going, if it's cheap its good. Lol

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne
M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Shadow Cartel
#3212 - 2013-09-08 17:54:13 UTC
CanI haveyourstuff wrote:
Wedgetail wrote:
as for incursion fleets marauders >> pirate battleships BUT harder to skill into, trickier to support, and so less prevelant - they are however the most powerful of battleship hulls that can be fielded in that environment.


Hmm... do I understand that marauders ">> as in better >>" than pirate battleships but harder to skill into?

well, there are rarely any marauder in incursion fleet tho because faction / pirate bs-es are just alot better and new changes will not make marauders more wanted in incursions either.


There are other aspects of EVE other than Vanguard fleets around the clock...

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
TravelBuoy
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#3213 - 2013-09-08 17:54:57 UTC  |  Edited by: TravelBuoy
Kat Ayclism wrote:
Marco Uvex wrote:
It looks to me as if Marauders going to be an expensive PvP tool?

Just a guess:
a) CCP could create a new line of Bs. PvP Specialised with web bonus. Cool

b) On the other hand CCP could improve the Tank of Black Ops and give them web bonuses (or warp disruption bonuses). I play EvE now for more than two years and from my experience this are less used ships at the moment. It could be an advantage for Black Ops ships (Question) which have no meaning in PvE.


This change may not be a welcome gift for the Marauder communitie (especially in Highsec). PvP is a big part of EvE but why transforming PvE in PvP? Please be more creative.

They aren't useful for PVP with the altered change proposal.

Now you have an expensive BS hull that either has normal weapons ranges, t2 resists, and a generous amount of utility highs or you have a sitting duck (unremote reppable, unmoving) but long ranged ship. Now, they *might* be usable as the first but then you've forced players to forego the bastion mechanic altogether in order to use them effectively for pvp. And as the second they are really, really unimpressive- no mobility, no remote reps, and the lack of a significant bonus to local reps means these things are just going to die even with the ranges they can engage in while bastioned. There is realistically only so much positioning you can gain even with a mjd because you will be still for an entire minute where your enemies will most likely not be.

This makes the price point vs ship utility rather skewed to the point that you probably don't want to use them at all for pvp. The resist profile from t2 resists is only so useful when your engagement range is so limited, that you may as well use a t1 hull that can outrange them and effectively trade ship for ship against them. And being a near exclusively local rep tanker with range but no mobility just means you'll be eaten alive while in bastion.

With the first round changes they were indeed insane for pve, but also had high potential for small and medium gang pvp- obviously large scale pvp and local reps don't really go together. Now the only place they'll be all that useful for pvp will be in alliance tournament-like environments.


Dont forget from your explanation, an inmobile ship is the best target.
They dont have realy big HP amount buffer, marauders is not capital ships. So, rep bonus not realy helping when they get concentrated attacks, such as SB bombers attacks and not need tracking speed for attackers when they maximising their DPS. Easy hunt them down in this bastion mode, and their pices is too high for PVP.
This idea is very dumb in this form.
Cassius Invictus
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#3214 - 2013-09-08 18:19:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Cassius Invictus
Benny Ohu wrote:
Shantetha wrote:
This is kinda duh at this point, which is prob why people haven't answered you.

yeah. this is why i'm trying to get more people to say "this is bad", because i don't believe anyone could possibly think this bonus is any good.

but there's not much talk of it, which makes it seem like a minor issue.

i'd like everyone who doesn't like it to say so, to make it very clear how bad this bonus is


Second it. Wrote that myself few times. But surprisingly Paladin seems to hold its own (only in PvE) even with two useless bonuses (cap and web). Still it should be changed to something more useful (hell, even -10% bonus on turrets cap use would work better though I hate that bonus altogether ).
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#3215 - 2013-09-08 18:27:30 UTC
Shantetha wrote:

again the entire problem is the XLASB x2.

Can we just make ASB a 1 per ship fitting rule already. Oversized ASBx2 on any ship makes it broken, and AAR aren't even comparable in effectiveness due to the 1 per ship rules.


Seriously, 90% of the tanking related problems in this game stem from dual XLASB (or XLASB in general). The idea that a ship can fit not one, but two, oversized reps is ridiculous.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Xequecal
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#3216 - 2013-09-08 18:34:06 UTC
Shantetha wrote:
Benny Ohu wrote:
This is my third post on the topic, so I'm going to sound like a broken record, but

1) Does anyone think the 5% cap bonus on Amarr Battleships for the Paladin is useful or should stay?

2) Can anyone think of why the Paladin should only have three bonuses?

And if you don't like it, and haven't said so, can you say so now?


1) 5% cap bonus / lvl should just be baked into the hull give a dps bonus instead. This is kinda duh at this point, which is prob why people haven't answered you.

2.) Might have originally be to counter the 1 sec crystal ammo changes that lasers can do. But no they should have 4 real bonuses like the other three marauders not 3 and " you will like a side of cap bonus with your armor repper?".


Marauders absolutely shouldn't get double DPS bonuses. Honestly, the Paladin would be pretty perfect with the cap bonus rolled into the hull and given a tank and tracking bonus in place of it and the web bonus.
James Sunder
572 CORP
#3217 - 2013-09-08 18:35:05 UTC
Benny Ohu wrote:
This is my third post on the topic, so I'm going to sound like a broken record, but

1) Does anyone think the 5% cap bonus on Amarr Battleships for the Paladin is useful or should stay?

2) Can anyone think of why the Paladin should only have three bonuses?

And if you don't like it, and haven't said so, can you say so now?
There are many ships that are screwed over by a bonus that should be rolled into the hull/mod or a bonus that can only be used in active tanking and not both active and passive for example. As we know this is in no way balance. But if I have to get over such bonuses, everyone else should also.


Ravasta Helugo wrote:
The 1 sec crystal ammo change is offset by the fact that lasers can only deal EM/Therm damage.
So tell me why hybrid weapons have a 5 sec ammo change when they only do Kin/Therm.
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#3218 - 2013-09-08 18:44:38 UTC
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:
161 pages of "rubixcube" effect.

Soon ™ we'll get another version closer to the real "plan" and the second part of this threadnaught will continue.

Keep the good stuff going, if it's cheap its good. Lol


I am betting this thread has a fair shot at 500 pages before the change are finalized.
I am also betting on a 100 page Sisi feedback thread once the Marauder changes are available there.

CCP really does not have a clue what to do with this ship.

Here is a hint: not EVERY ship in the Eve universe has to be geared towards PvP.
I can envision a situation where my Redeemer will be a better PvE ship than my Paladin, given the direction these changes are going.
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#3219 - 2013-09-08 18:59:02 UTC
James Sunder wrote:
Benny Ohu wrote:
This is my third post on the topic, so I'm going to sound like a broken record, but

1) Does anyone think the 5% cap bonus on Amarr Battleships for the Paladin is useful or should stay?

2) Can anyone think of why the Paladin should only have three bonuses?

And if you don't like it, and haven't said so, can you say so now?
There are many ships that are screwed over by a bonus that should be rolled into the hull/mod or a bonus that can only be used in active tanking and not both active and passive for example. As we know this is in no way balance. But if I have to get over such bonuses, everyone else should also.


Ravasta Helugo wrote:
The 1 sec crystal ammo change is offset by the fact that lasers can only deal EM/Therm damage.
So tell me why hybrid weapons have a 5 sec ammo change when they only do Kin/Therm.

Very short range
AskariRising
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#3220 - 2013-09-08 19:23:52 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.


web bonus on a golem is like giving a knife to a sniper... its not very useful at the ranges you'll want to be engaging at :/

web range though... would be very useful especially if i'm in bastion mode and need to slow someone trying to get close to me.