Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Bastion Module: i think i could like it

but change the beloved shieldboostbonus (Golem) to a Webberbonus?!?
I mostly fight Sansha PvE so I'll have less repp-amount (without Bastion) and even a Meta 9 Webber only has 15 km range while my Sansha-rats hang around 20-30 km!
So i would say Web-bonus ist truly useless.

Also i heard Guristas like to hang at more than 15 km range.

So what is the Webber good for? Frigates? My drones will do that... or a large Smartbomb (not in Highsec in know) in the extra High
And what module should i change for a mostly useless Webber?
Tank? (uhh... no due to lost Shildboostbonus)
TP (no, i like to shoot BS with ragetorpedos while doing near full damage)
so any ideas?

No, I think right now they're just a little bit sad, maybe even depressed.

They had this really cool and new Idea and for sub caps it was really unique and it would've given the marauder a totally new role, apart from it's previous occupation.

But all they received was 180 pages of nerd rage, whining and hate...

So I guess they'll be drunk and depressed for another week or so before they (hopefully) recover and get back to some marauder iteration that is closer to what they wanted to do before lots of guys clogged this thread with their "I wanna have a web bonus! Marauders are now crap because I can't use them in incursions anymore! I refuse any change at all!" whine threads.

Seriously, crying about a ship rebalance (repurpose?) just because it wouldn't have been top notch in incursions or solo roaming afterwards, or just because it had one single situational weakness after the rebalance... That's ridiculous.

first: except that it doesn't - marauders in PVP today already fight the way the bastion module tries to make them fight, so they don't need to use bastion unless they're already well and truly in a position where they're going to die and want to draw it out as long as possible. (which is why ccp tried to shoe horn the rep bonus onto bastion to offer some kind of advantage to using the module)


this meant that ccp stole from the PVE runners the primary reason(s) for owning a marauder in the first place, while simultaneously giving pvpers nothing they didn't already have in exchange for no longer being able to runaway form certain death.


in terms of a single situational weakness, that's a very big problem - one weakness means if these things ever became prevalent that only ever one counter move would be used - it stifles fleet creativity, peeps resort to only using the easiest way to do something as it is, and we want to make this worse by forcing a situation where players must use one doctrine to win? - the ships must have multiple weaknesses and multiple strengths that compensate, as bastion is now, it doesn't offer either.

- only removes the positive strengths of the hulls in both environments for the sake of a laughable MJD dependent role idea that no one uses as it is (despite having the option to do so with the current marauders, or even standard battleships)

mentioned this before, but the ships are not what's broken, they have a role and they're good at it - what's broken are the various game mechanics the ships need to use in order to do what they do - that's the part that's resulting in the appearance that the hulls are unbalanced. (also, the single purpose views of the people that fly said ships - 100 missioners cry that the ships are no good cuz it doesn't do the same thing and all of a sudden ccp gets the impression the ship's broken)

"when i fit armor tank and shield tanks to the same ship why does the shield one always seem better for incursions?"

'cuz armor fits are better at using mid slot subversion and projection modules you don't need in incursions and so you falsely believe that armor is some how deficient, despite both doctrines being capable of the same damage outputs, try fitting low slot mods damage and rig damage on your armor tanks..see what happens'

"why are my marauders only good for missions and not for pvp?"

'cuz you're thinking to fly them the same way you do in missions when you try to use them in pvp....you can't tank against players the same way you tank rats..players hurt more - therefore you must adapt your doctrine for the different environment you'll be facing - even if it means discarding your beloved tractor beam and shield boost bonus'

when you look at balancing a ship in eve, a game where ships can be fit to use almost any role, you have to think of the fittings that sit on the hull before you think of the hull itself - then you build the ship around the kinds of fits you want to work better than others, cuz the fittings you want to use determine good ship skill bonuses, determine PG and CPU values, determine fitting slot layouts.

aye, though the 200 pages are kinda normal - am thankful there have been a few around that are trying to refine ideas they make as they go - and more importantly help refine other people's

i used shoehorn cuz that's honestly what it feels like they're doing - "well this first idea didn't quite fit lets throw it back into the furnace and belt it a few times and maybe that'll fix it, won't matter if the metal becomes brittle"..rather than getting an entirely new block and starting again.

I don't feel they needed to though, but you're more or less on the ball with how the seacond one felt.

I think iteration 2 was more of a stoke than a genuine proposal, if so it feckin worked. Can't wait to see what it ends up as

Irony?

Anyways, so what?!

In a few days I'll have completely maxed out all the marauder support skills, do you see me complaining about the marauder update? The first marauder iteration would've been super awesome! One of the coolest things I've ever seen in this game, regarding ship rebalancing / updates.

All that whining was totally pointless, all everyone saw was how the marauders used to be and how they wanted them to be and once it was clear CCP wouldn't give them exactly what some guys had imagined them to be in their heads the thread turned into one giant "Y u no giv uberboat?!" tardfest.

Really, it's just ridiculous.

CCP should've kept the first iteration, it had the most complaints (which also means that it most probably was the best suggestion so far).

There are three significant changes here to the common attributes of the current Marauder class. I'll try to explain my reasoning behind each one in detail before getting into the changes to each hull.

High Slots, Hard Points, and Weapon Damage Role Bonus
The most extreme change presented in this proposal by far compared to the current Marauders or the developer rebalancing is the addition of an 8th high slot that is also a turret/launcher hardpoint. The primary driver for this approach is to provide something of real value to balance the bastion module against. This change is paired with Bastion module requiring a turret/launcher hard point to be fit.

It is important to note that the Weapon Damage special ability was also reduced from 100% down to 75%. Here's a comparison of effective weapons between the TQ Marauders, Pirate BS, and this proposal and the overall effect on raw damage potential:

• Paladin TQ: 10
• Paladin New: 10.9
• Nightmare: 10 (I know, I don't like this either. More later)
• Golem TQ: 8
• Golem New: 8.75
• Kronos TQ: 10
• Kronos New: 10.9
• Vindicator: 11
• Vargur TQ: 10
• Vargur New: 10.9
• Machariel: 10.9

Overall the new Marauder sees a 9.375% increase in damage potential over their TQ versions with all 5 hard points occupied. For this added damage they expend more 25% more ammo and/or 25% more cap/s. The overall efficiency of running missions should be about the same with faster mission time through increased DPS but more frequent resupply.

There are 2 issues I see with this approach. First, as it stands without having any information about the Pirate rebalance direction, the Paladin will simply be about 10% higher damage than the Nighmare. However, the nightmare does have the advantage of being shield tanked, has 75mb drone bandwidth, and will likely have a 4th heat sink fitted while the Paladin will most likely only have 3. The comparison between the Vargur and Machariel is still in the Machariel's favor as it is far and away more maneuverable than the Vargur after initial engagement.

The other issue is that it might be compelling to remove the explosion velocity bonus from the Golem and replace it with a straight 5%/lvl damage bonus. For all targets, a 25% damage bonus is better than the explosion velocity bonus while the target's speed remains below 750m/s. Targets on approach will likely take roughly the same damage as before. However, once orbiting they would take more damage. It's a toss up really. I left the explosion velocity bonus in place for now.

Sensor Strength
The super low sensor strength is a wicked limitation in both PVE and PVP depending on your weapon systems and NPC targets. It almost single handedly precludes the Marauder class from being PVP viable outside the use of some special module like Bastion. Give these hulls T1 sensor strength and be done with it.

T2 Resists + 25% local repair
Anyone who has followed the developer thread knows that this has been the most hotly debated changed proposed by the developers. The Marauder class trades it's local repair bonus for their full T2 racial resist profile. I personally don't like the exchange as it makes some hulls better than others and hulls like the Paladin actually become worse in missions because of it. To alleviate some of the burdon, all Marauders have a 5%/lvl bonus to local repair instead of the 7.5%.

Miscelaneous Changes
Other notable changes include increasing the bonus to tractor beam range to 200% making them effective out to 72m. This guarantees they will reach anywhere within a mission space after at most 1 MJD use and most likely everywhere if positioned in the center of the pocket. Another change sees the hull get a special MJD built-in. This frees up a medium power slot for use and eliminates the loss of hull bonus if you didn't want to fit the module. You can still choose not to use it for whatever reason but your fitting options remain as flexible as they are today. With the very low base speed of these hulls, most will likely want to have a second prop module to the MJD even further limiting the fitting options. Just build the thing in. Make it non-functional for non-skilled pilots if you have to.

Overall I think these changes make the Marauder class widely useful in many aspects of EVE gameplay without requiring the Bastion module to be effective.

Ship Specifics
I've chosen to maintain the basic ship statistics for fittings presented in the developer thread. Those can be assumed unless specifically mentioned in each ship's section.

Paladin
Amarr Battleship Skill Bonus:

• 7.5% bonus to Large Energy Turret tracking
• 7.5% bonus to Large Energy Turret optimal range

Marauder Skill Bonus:

• 5% bonus to Large Energy Turret damage
• 5% bonus to local repair amount

*Roll some or all of the capacitor bonus into the base hull

Golem
Caldari Battleship Bonus:

• 10% bonus to effectiveness of target painters
• 10% bonus to cruise missile and torpedo velocity

Marauder Skill Bonus:

• 5% bonus to cruise missile and torpedo rate of fire
• 5% bonus to local repair amount

Kronos
Gallente Battleship Bonus:

• 7.5% bonus to Large Hybrid Turret tracking
• 10% bonus to Large Hybrid Turret falloff range

Marauder Skill Bonus:

• 5% bonus to Large Hybrid Turret damage
• 5% bonus to local repair amount

Vargur
Minmatar Battleship Bonus:

• 7.5% bonus to Large Projectile Turret tracking
• 10% bonus to Large Projectile Turret falloff range

Marauder Skill Bonus:

• 5% bonus to Large Projectile Turret rate of fire
• 5% bonus to local repair amount

I organized the bonuses into application and projection for the always lvl 5 battleship skill while linking the best bonuses of damage and local repair to the longer train time of the Marauder skill.

Ms. Ambraelle has some interesting proposals, but I wonder: just how much of that stuff is codeable within current EVE engine without requiring massive code rewriting that can presumably take years.

No offence, bight now I'm looking for a polite synonym for the word idiotic...

The Redeemer is a good ship, even for pve, unlike for example the widow. But, it's in no way comparable to a paladin or the golem, and with CCP's first marauder rebalance iteration the redeemer wouldn't have been able to hold a candle to the various marauder ships.

And don't you dare start with that incursion rubbish again. Incursions are not the only thing in high sec.