Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Vargur not so much, it can output EM fine while having native EM/therm resists. Vargur and Golem also have better versatility for single ship pilots.

Woops, must have missed your post. One second while I dig into some numbers.

Also for reference I'm a dedicated Hybrids pilot, I fly almost exclusively Blaster and Railgun boats and am well versed in their strengths and weaknesses. If you believe 90% webs are required for a Blaster ship then you're using them wrong.



First off, the AB buff works both ways, helping Blaster boats as well as their enemies, so does the MWD/scram changes. With a web and a scram an enemy with a MWD is going to have a hard time pulling range on a Blaster ship.

You are of-course entitled to your opinion, but I fail to see any good justification for a system that completely destroyed smaller ships if they get within web-range and reduced combat to a nearly static "I shoot then you shoot" scenario.

I was curious about your claims of "orbiting with impunity" so I decided to take a fairly stock Megathron fit and throw it against, as you said, a purely blank Stabber (with all 5s on both). This was the result with Neutrons on the Megathron and one T2 web.

As for your claim that a frigate can get in close enough to mitigate this, this is only true right up until that web turns on. At this point the Battleship is actually moving faster than the ABing frigate (and he's certainly not going to be MWDing at that range either because he's scrammed or because it would kill his tracking and the sig bloom would kill him). This means that the Battleship can now pull range on the frigate and reduce the traversal to almost nothing, and that's without even turning on a prop-mod.

As for the dual web scenario, anything that makes the answer "well you can't engage that ship with an entire ship class" is bad balancing. Battleships are supposed to be at least somewhat vulnerable to smaller hulls due to their speed and maneuverability. This is why smaller hulls do less damage and have less HP. If you can completely negate that advantage then there's a balance problem since no other battleship can do that.

Back in 2009 they also created one of the single most powerful hulls in the game that's proceeded to over-shadow every other T1 and T2 hybrids platform with its raw DPS and web bonus. It's even generally considered flat better than many ships that don't use the same weapons system because that web bonus makes it essentially immune to smaller ships getting under its guns and if they pull range then they're easier to track.

Overall you're just sounding like a bitter-vet whose favorite OP toy got taken away.

Technically there's a 1% chance to deal a wrecking hit at any range, which is roughly 300% strength, which is why your DPS never drops belong 3% no matter how long your range goes, relying on this is extremely impractical however.

i had been typing an explanation but forum said no not posting - so i'll sort it out later

first cade: i have to apologize for neglecting to factor in the golem and kronos into my consideration, my neglect detracted from the discussion.

- yes i was referring to autocanons specifically loaded with barrage and a pair of TC's (50 km is the range a vargur has using EMP)

range works as: optimal + falloff = 50% damage optimal + falloffx2 = near 0

minmatar fight at optimal + (falloff x 1.5) (~33% max damage application) - something vagabonds do all the time - this is considered acceptable and the vargur's weapon range and tracking combinations is what makes this viable.

the thinking was based upon the premise that the majority of gangs are cruisers and frigates, battleships not becoming prevalent until the gang reaches about 10-15 people or more (due to the fact that battleships are cumbersome and difficult to support in lower numbers)

so there is not one or two marauders, but 4 or 5, prioritising the destruction of cruiser size hulls from about 80-150 km - which is my maximum expected engagement range for a marauder using short range weapons (if they started pelting me with autocannon fire from 200 km i'd be a bit shocked yea? XD )

(i used 150 as the upper limit, the "worst case" out of laziness, and the assumption that anything lower than that range would be more manageable for an aggressor)

After all I read a refund of SP woud be the best solution for all ( if the "rebalancing" ever getting real).

Segmenting things off because this is a lot of points and I'd rather things not get convoluted.



-I'm not claiming it makes the hulls incomplete I'm saying that trading the local rep bonus for the T2 resists makes 2 of these hulls noticeably worse at PvE than the other two because they have to make a trade-off that the other two do not.

- Lets see, Blockade, ____ Extravaganza, Worlds Collide, Cargo Delivery is pretty nasty due to the neuting, and there's a good number of others.

Remember, my claim was not that ANY T1 battleship couldn't tank missions, it was that most can't. There's a reason the Raven and Dominix are most of what you hear about for T1 mission ships in PvE circles. The Dominix relies on either 2-3 repair modules or a MJD and the Raven relies on burning down incomming damage before it can either get in range or break your tank and that strategy may still require warp-outs for some missions.




The ability to juggle tank mods due to T2 resists only applies if you're facing rats that deal the type of damage your T2 resists are bonused toward. As my previous post points out the vast majority of mission damage is Kinetic and Thermal and both Gallente and Caldari T2 hulls get bonuses against both. This means that no matter what rats they're going against they'll be able to take advantage of at least part of their bonus and against most rats they can take advantage of the full bonus. They also don't have to make a trade-off between resisting damage better and dealing damage better since their resist profiles give them a buff against the rats that they deal the best damage against already.

For Amarr and Minmattar however you have secondary bonuses to Kinetic and Thermal respectively which are smaller than their primary bonus by a good margin. On top of this the rats that they deal the best damage against don't deal either of the types they're bonused toward.

This means that overall with the loss of the 7.5% per level local tank bonus they are in a worse state as mission ships than they are on TQ currently since they now have to make a trade-off that the other two do not in addition to losing overall repair power.



The damage profile on Amarr ships is only an issue if it forces you to choose between things you can tank effectively and things you can deal damage to effectively.

In PvP this isn't much of an issue since most people tend to be omni-tanked anyway and Thermal is a good damage type to deal and EM tends to be one of the lower resistances on at least armored tanked ships post hole patching.



Tweaking resists to match mission rats hurts the ships in PvP. I'm not advocating for the T2 resists to go away or for the resist profile to change, I'm advocating for a local repair bonus on the hulls, preferably rather than on the Bastion module since having one on each seems to be a bit problematic.



Yes, however it partly survived this change because another ship using the same skill requirements dropped into the slot it used to occupy with very little fuss.

Since the Marauders only have one ship per race under this skill it makes sense for them to keep their role and niche rather than seeing a drastic shift. If you want a ship for another role it should go under another skill.

You'll also note that the 50+ pages before that were a different set of "same people" where as there's been many new faces against the current proposal.

I just want state that as a Kronos and Vargur pilot (i never liked the paladin or golem but i can currently fly them) I dont like the Bastion module, Nor do i particularly like the resist changes. The Marauders Active tank bonus helps keep it from being super effective at PvP applications as buffer is usually better (though the Vargur does interesting things with it due to the OPness of the XLASB)

the real issue that i see is what exactly is this ship being rebalanced to do? The bastion module is not good for pvp, Sitting at stand still is a good way to die in a fire, very fast, and with a vulnerability to neuts, active armor tanks are dead where they stand.
The only pvp winner there is the Vargur, as it gets an incredible boost to local tank (Dual XLASB, one reloads while one runs in Bastion) and has no significant issues applying its dps at engagement ranges.

For PvE, most missions require travel of 10-50 km ranges, rarely does one need to move more then 70km within a mission at a time, It is usually only the salvaging of a mission that requires the long distance movement that a mjd would provide though generally only for one or two wrecks.*

* The only mission i can think of that i need to move a lot in is Mordus headhunters, where the farthest group at ~140km only has an engagement range of some 50km and will return back to their spawn after moving that far.

This role is most often taken by a Noctis, as they have much longer tractor ranges then a marauder and can do that specific part of the job better. *

* this is all play style and choices. I personally will wait till enemies are within my tractor range (which on a kronos is the same as optimal engagement ranges) and thus generally do not need a noctis.

I havent seen any indication that Bastion is any better then current performance, As the CCP dev who used it in an example has not shown it to be better in any way, only different. And only in one very specific fitting style.

The worst thing the Devs can threaten the player-base with is giving them what they ask for

As he said in his last post, they're testing both setups and probably some others we haven't seen yet.

Plus the web-bonus was mostly requested by the PvP crowd, not the PvE people, who since the last version seem to be mostly against the web bonus.

Many longer playing pvp'ers are blaming 90% webs for dreadblapping working aswell as it currently does (and should imo), with 81% (?) webs, stacking penalties will reduce the max efficiency of the two webs max you could ever justify from some 97% down to some 90% (?). It is a whole lot better in comparison to a traditional unbonused web, but it doesn't push them over the edge I believe. 7.5% bonus is a fine thing, now that the repairbonus mostly got built into the hull by resistances.

As was looking forward to flying a Vargur with the first revision, now looking forward to fly a paladin :>

Actually with two webs it only drops from around 97.83% to 95.06%. Still very dread-blap viable.

As for whether or not dread-blapping *should* work as well as it does... not the place for that debate. We can wait for when the capital-ships balance threadnaught starts up in six months to a year for that doozy of a debate