Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Considering tanking is NOT the hard part on a LEvel 4...


If you guys want some buff that pleases GOOD l4 runners (not the noobish ones that think the more tank the better) And also please PVPers, add an extra damage bonus or an extra weapon.

Hell no, keep nerfing bitter vets! xD

Thanks for the read. I would surmise that for missions you are correct, but what about PvP? Note that Caldari ships suck for EM resistance (typically 0-20), but with two T2 EM amplifiers it's easy to get this into the high 60's and low 70's without much effort. I imagine the same would be true for kinetic and thermal on the Vargur and Paladin. Let's also not forget that there are no shield strength implants, so it's quite easy to turn the Paladin into a flying brick with a set of Slave implants.

What I wouldn't mind seeing for Marauders is a set of short and long-range skills (instead of the fixed stasis web):

• Paladin: Tracking, Damage
• Golem: Target Painter, Missile Velocity
• Kronos: Tracking, Optimal
• Vargur: Stasis Web, Falloff

I still think that if Bastion is going to reduce your speed to zero it should also compensate for the immobility by increasing tracking speed and explosion radius, increasing rate of fire by 50% and doubling the load time.

What I would like to see instead, given the name bastion (a "safe place to run to when you're in danger")

is to use the bastion module not as a personal defense, but a FLEET DEFENSE mechanism, and it can achieve this through offensive tactics, put the MJD bonus onto the bastion mod, disable all other movement BUT the MJD ( so i can jump....ONCE)

keep resistance penalty, EWAR immunity and lock out of RR, drop my weapon range by half, increase damage by 15-30%(the idea being to force my ship into a "do or die mode")

the purpose is to use this ship now to break a death lock, as i can enter very quickly but not leave this state i must be careful how i use it, and when - but by doing this i gain, like overheat a very self harming but powerful means of defending my fleet by killing the ships killing them, if you wann amake fighting interesting you must build mechanics that allow for these choices, choices to lose to save the rest, avoid your current attempts at designing doctrines that keep out of harms way, and encourage people to do what must be done when it has to be done.

The trick is that the better you tank the less modules you have to devote to said tank and the more you can devote to actually finishing the mission in a timely and efficient manner :)

Therefore anything that nerfs your local tank is bad news for a mission ship.



FYI no it's not, you will find yourself having to warp out of most of the harder but higher bounty missions doing this "if you are not doing them perfectly"

Seriously when did you last do a mission and have you ever had to deal with neuting battleships in them?



As someone already pointed out resists are posted in the OP.

Any ship with a bonus to web range and velocity can effectively hold and blap frigates and cruisers at absurd range without them being able to do anything about it, plus it can potentially do this to more or less the entire radius of even a quite large Stargate...

To say that giving bonus bonuses to one ship would be imbalanced would be something of an understatement.

Active tanking as it currently stands is intentional on CCP's part and this is probably not the thread to get into a huge debate on "fixing" it. Armor gets better resists, shield gets better active modules that eat more cap. *Tradeoffs*



DPS boosts on Bastion are a bad idea. For reference as to why look up "Dread-Blapping". These are not supposed to be hyper-DPS battleships.

In general T2 resists provide similar bonuses to tanking, it's just a little harder to find a hole in a Minmattar shield tank or Amarr armor tank. As a rule you'll rarely find an EM hole in a caldari shield tank or an explosive hole in a Gallente armor tank. Also the damage distribution on weapons is still pretty heavily Kin/Therm weighted even in PvP so a heavy Kin/Therm tank can actually be more useful than the Explosive and EM resists on Amarr and Minmattar ships respectively (it does absolutely nothing against Hybrids, for example)

The general consensus from the Vargur crowd is that the Vargur is not a good ship for a web bonus.

Also these ships have four bonuses, not two and need to be flexible enough in range selection for missions. In general I'm a fan of seeing a range and damage application bonus on all four, possibly even two damage application bonuses.

This rings blatantly false to me. CCP have created something designed for PvE and said "lets see what the PvP crowd does with it". Not designed the module for PvP.



In the OP "adapt to battlefield changes" very clearly refers to the MJD and its ability to move you around the battlefield quickly, nothing more. Under your definition these ships should have an 8/8/8 slot layout so it can fit for every possible contingency.

Also T2 ships in general are specialized and small gangs tend to be specialized to one degree or another with various people flying tackle, DD, and various types of support like Logi, EWar, and Command Links.

T3s actually don't do as much damage as battleships (not sure where that rumor came from) and cost has never been a factor to some people, whether it's PvP or PvE. If someone finds a use for the ship where it's marginally better than a similar hull then the ship will get used by people with ISK and the desire to win.



This would kind of be ridiculously over-powered. Just for a start you can jump through into a gate-camp, align, Bastion, and then start shelling them from 100km away, probably well out of any bubbles and likely out of their engagement range as well. Meanwhile your Heavy Tackle has jumped through and the enemy is at best trying to rally and get a warp-in, at worst they're scattering with several of them pinned down by your heavy tackle.

Part of what makes the whole E-War immunity package vaguely balanced is that you can't be tackled but you also don't need to be.

the ideas here were that:

ships in gangs must be more versatile than in blob fleets, therefore must be able to cope with a wider variety of situations, what they cannot do themselves they must draw from other ships in the gang, t3's are very good platforms for doing this and for their size the damage output is colossal - they are also easier to defend due to a smaller profile and higher speed, for less isk, making them a preferred choice over a battleship for gang combat.

the marauder's power in a gang comes from its wide fire arc and its utility high slots - not its active repair bonuses, one ship cannot defend against 10 ( see alliance tourney for a readily available example) - this is why logistics is limited to one ship per team, in reality there is no limit.

yes, the idea was to use the MJD, but to use the MJD i must forego the use of my ASB or my resistances or my tracking computers or a web, i will lose something as i have no room in mids - therefore I must focus all of my attention into my guns and the MJD to use this doctrine well, and rely on everyone else to keep me alive..which they can't do cuz..logi can't rep me glass cannon doctrine is glass cannon.



hence to cut the range by half, so i can't fight at that range even if i wanted to, i must move TOWARD the enemy, not away from, and once i have moved once i will be unable to move again, leaving me wide open to the counter barrage of fire that will very soon be raining down on my head, I must close to point ranges using the MJD in order to rapidly remove a threat, to use this to run away from one threat (like a gate camp) will leave me exposed to enemy tackle and death, that said i do agree that with the web bonus proposed to all marauders currently this scenario is less likely to occur, so I will append to the statement not to add to the marauders a propulsion jamming bonus at all.

Also want to point out that I did not count "tackle" as "EWAR" though i should have, by EWAR i refer to ECM, sensor dampeners tracking disruption and target painting - if this ship is silly enough to hold itself in place then my opponent has the right to tackle me to keep me there when i want to leave, to bolster myself in space should make me vulnerable to enemy frigates and cruisers the idea must be dangerous, and force me to rely on other people to defend me while i'm in such a blatantly aggressive stance.

this is a factor with just about any minmatar t2 shield tank - you can tank a minmatar t2+ ship on a single invuln because of how balanced the resistance profile is (the opposite is true for minmatar t2+ armor tanks, which have a native weakness to expl. kin)

Does anyone here know how mission runners fit their kronos' at the moment? I'd be keen to know as I've never seen one being used on TQ other than for combat-salvaging a c5 sleeper site.

pls "like" the post if you reply so I can find the answer, or mail me in game.

ps. I'm not trolling, just be keen to know. I always assumed it would be rails & perma-tank, but ytterbium's demo post a few hundred pages back made me wonder.