These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Hypercake Mix
#3761 - 2013-09-16 12:20:03 UTC
Idea. Meh base stats, lots of slots like 8/8/7 for shielders, and 100/125 bandwidth/bay. What could possibly go wrong?
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#3762 - 2013-09-16 13:37:09 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Barrogh Habalu wrote:
Lloyd Roses wrote:
From the sounds of it, would highly like the 100% repairamount to become a 50% cycletime-reduction + 50% cap consumption reduction.

In fact, some active tanking mods (ahem) could use this treatment applied to them, regardless of the hull...
But that's another, pretty much flame-inducing, topic...

But wait. If your idea is to be implemented, it can solve that pesky ASB-on-the-marauder-with-GOOD-bastion-mod issue. Here, have your sick burst tank, but you will have to reload it much sooner.

And while we are at it, it's possible to set the numbers differently to balance dem mods out, for example:

-50% cycle time;
-50% cap consumption;
+0% repair amount.

Or:

-33% cycle time;
-33% cap consumption;
+34% repair amount.

etc. Unless I messed up numbers, that still amounts to "+100% HP per second using same amount of cap per second" while allowing devs to tweak ancillary/normal mods balance.

The downside is, as always, that AARs are completely screwed up unless you can specifically make a bonus to paste consumption.


I am really liking this idea since it rather neatly gets around the ASB debacle while affecting AARs at least less if not leaving them completely unaffected.

I have a niggling concern over the potential effects when combine with certain deadspace modules but overall I like the idea of a more sustained tank (part of the objective of a mission fit) over ridiculous burst tanking a lot more. Plus it helps against annoying neuting enemies by letting you potentially get more rep cycles off before they clean out your cap again, or even get rep cycles off at all.


My main concern for a long time now has been he way to huge repamounts given the basehp. On a lowsec vargur (HG crystals, CS-links, strong blue), you're achieving something around the 7k shieldboosts, or near 80% of your max HP. While it is okay for shields which are easy to apply tahnks to instaboosts, go over to armor <.<

10k buffer, repping 6k with each AAR cycle.... sure. Nice design. This' gonna bleed structure nonstop.

Cycletime and capreduction is mostly the only choice to not mess it up with the uberapplications made possible by ASBs/AARs.
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#3763 - 2013-09-16 13:50:58 UTC
Lloyd Roses wrote:

My main concern for a long time now has been he way to huge repamounts given the basehp. On a lowsec vargur (HG crystals, CS-links, strong blue), you're achieving something around the 7k shieldboosts, or near 80% of your max HP. While it is okay for shields which are easy to apply tahnks to instaboosts, go over to armor <.<

10k buffer, repping 6k with each AAR cycle.... sure. Nice design. This' gonna bleed structure nonstop.

Cycletime and capreduction is mostly the only choice to not mess it up with the uberapplications made possible by ASBs/AARs.


I share your concern about these ubertanks and you make a good point. However my concern is from a different perspective.

I simply don't think it's OK for a battleship to have a 6 or 7k tank, not without logistics support and certainly not a permatank.

This is said by a person who regularly flies solo (or dual box) self rep pvp in a variety of hulls. If anything, you'd expect me to welcome this kind of tank but actually I don't. I get almost 2k/s from a hyperion and that can stand up to 3 or 4 ships easily... for a while.

And that's the point. Making a last stand while tackled is one thing. Easily beating off 8 assailants without batting an eyelid is really no fun for anyone. It's just not challenging.

If bastion has a role (and I am not sure that it does), it should be in evasion, not tanking.

Marauders already tank sufficiently - particularly since the local repair buffs. They don't need any more OPness in PVP - 1500dps from a blaster kronos is fine. What they could use is a way to operate in hostile space while having a good probability of returning in one piece.

Having read most of the posts, it seems to me that simply making them a bit faster and increasing the tractor beam range and speed, plus maybe a little powergrid and CPU would mean that we'd see more of them in space. Having done that, we could look again at whether they need further work.

This bastion thing is an idea looking for a home. That home is not on marauders.

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
#3764 - 2013-09-16 14:17:16 UTC
Bastion itself would be fir nice into a more supportwise role... I dunno exactly which one but my feelings something like a Bubble with effect which increase something would be nice...
Iome Ambraelle
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#3765 - 2013-09-16 14:57:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Iome Ambraelle
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
Lloyd Roses wrote:

My main concern for a long time now has been he way to huge repamounts given the basehp. On a lowsec vargur (HG crystals, CS-links, strong blue), you're achieving something around the 7k shieldboosts, or near 80% of your max HP. While it is okay for shields which are easy to apply tahnks to instaboosts, go over to armor <.<

10k buffer, repping 6k with each AAR cycle.... sure. Nice design. This' gonna bleed structure nonstop.

Cycletime and capreduction is mostly the only choice to not mess it up with the uberapplications made possible by ASBs/AARs.


I share your concern about these ubertanks and you make a good point. However my concern is from a different perspective.

I simply don't think it's OK for a battleship to have a 6 or 7k tank, not without logistics support and certainly not a permatank.

This is said by a person who regularly flies solo (or dual box) self rep pvp in a variety of hulls. If anything, you'd expect me to welcome this kind of tank but actually I don't. I get almost 2k/s from a hyperion and that can stand up to 3 or 4 ships easily... for a while.

And that's the point. Making a last stand while tackled is one thing. Easily beating off 8 assailants without batting an eyelid is really no fun for anyone. It's just not challenging.

If bastion has a role (and I am not sure that it does), it should be in evasion, not tanking.

Marauders already tank sufficiently - particularly since the local repair buffs. They don't need any more OPness in PVP - 1500dps from a blaster kronos is fine. What they could use is a way to operate in hostile space while having a good probability of returning in one piece.

Having read most of the posts, it seems to me that simply making them a bit faster and increasing the tractor beam range and speed, plus maybe a little powergrid and CPU would mean that we'd see more of them in space. Having done that, we could look again at whether they need further work.

This bastion thing is an idea looking for a home. That home is not on marauders.

This is why I wanted to remove the active tanking bonus from the ranged version of bastion while swapping it out for a raw HP buffer on armor and shields for the stand-and-deliver bastion module/script. This provides the "last stand" scenario without reducing incoming damage or increase self repair. It simply adds time to live. You can't do this with resists because although they increase EHP just like a boost to raw HP, they also increase the local repair EHP/s values as well. That double dip is what makes it too much. I think a boost in time to live would be great. In the case of you versus a group, you might be able to kill mail an additional foe before losing the hull.

Shield Tanking - Why armor tanking can't have nice things.

Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#3766 - 2013-09-16 15:09:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Sergeant Acht Scultz
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
Marauders already tank sufficiently - particularly since the local repair buffs. They don't need any more OPness in PVP - 1500dps from a blaster kronos is fine. What they could use is a way to operate in hostile space while having a good probability of returning in one piece



Like for instance, instead of "zdat" bastion mode: Bubble immune (but not scram or focused point)

Nothing cloak or whatever the heck transformer-stinky-stuff-leave-that-for-Dust514, just the MJD bonus and bubble immune. This on top of Sensor buff (DO IT TBH !! What you afraid of? hun??) would help them go somewhere do some stuff and eventually get back, eventually means they wouldn't find anyone capable to set a group of players together to counter them and knowing how this ship works.
Yep a bit like Black Ops, so many tears about it when those are so easy to counter.

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne

Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#3767 - 2013-09-16 15:30:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Somewhat unrelated to the more technical discussions going on I know... but since (presumably) more involved hull animations are now possible, will we soon be seeing something more dynamic on the animation front happening when cap ship Siege and Triage modes are engaged?

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#3768 - 2013-09-16 16:02:37 UTC
The issue with rep ammount beign too close to base HP can be solved by changing Bastion bonus from repair ammount into
50% less time on repair/boost cycle and 50% reduction on cap usage of repair/boost modules.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#3769 - 2013-09-16 16:28:12 UTC
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
Marauders already tank sufficiently - particularly since the local repair buffs. They don't need any more OPness in PVP - 1500dps from a blaster kronos is fine. What they could use is a way to operate in hostile space while having a good probability of returning in one piece



Like for instance, instead of "zdat" bastion mode: Bubble immune (but not scram or focused point)

Nothing cloak or whatever the heck transformer-stinky-stuff-leave-that-for-Dust514, just the MJD bonus and bubble immune. This on top of Sensor buff (DO IT TBH !! What you afraid of? hun??) would help them go somewhere do some stuff and eventually get back, eventually means they wouldn't find anyone capable to set a group of players together to counter them and knowing how this ship works.
Yep a bit like Black Ops, so many tears about it when those are so easy to counter.


Yup, basically you want the marauder to be able to get through/past a gate without getting blown up every time,

Bastion could do this if it's effect was to allow the MJD to work even when there was a scram on it.

In this case I would suggest that the MJD cooldown is not reduced by the marauder.

This means the marauder would have 1 get-out-of-jail-free card per gate or per mission site. A determined gang could still kill it by re-acquiring a lock with a fast ship before the the marauder warped off (you just need to watch where it's headed and get a point ship out in that direction). They would then have 3 minutes to kill it. or energy neutralise it to the point where it could not MJD again.

In this case the sensor strength should not be increased - it's a pve ship, now with niche pvp application (it can attack until jammed, and then escape - once).

That would make a gank attempt interesting and rewarding for both attackers and defender I think.

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".

Aimee Maken
Atasaki Holdings
#3770 - 2013-09-16 16:43:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Aimee Maken
My biggest thing is that this is the most advanced boat in eve in terms of training time needed for a sub cap. And you guys are trying to harmonize them all with the same stick, regardless of the unique weapon system and racial plays they have.
What I purpose is to have the goal of the marauders to be “Showing the best the race has to offer, and to shore up any weakness in that method”

With that in mind, I purpose these things:

For the kornos, the bastion mode will NOT root it in place, but rather give it a reduction to MWD cap use and large sig bloom reduction from MWD. The base agility is increased and base mass in decreased, so that it can turn faster and better while MWDing.
This is to enhance the use of blasters, that would mean that a kornos with T2 can be cap stable with either a shield booster / armor rep or a MWD. With bling you should be able to be cap stable with shield booster / armor rep AND a MWD (while still dishing out 1200+ dps at short range). MWD should be on most of the time if not perma on.

For the vargur, the bastion mode will not root it in place, reduce sig radius and give a fall off bonus to projectiles. Coupled with a nice base speed boost, this should emphasize the use of a mobile AC boat for PvE. It would need longer tractor range to 50 KM.
It would be a speedy boat that zips around, while having some nice projection power, and staying alive by reducing incoming damage with a low sig, and thus likely to either pulse MWD or to use an AB for the speed boost. This thing won’t be cap stable with all mods on, but should be able to dps tank + sig tank.

For the Paladin, the bastion mode will REDUCE its maximum speed, but you would get a large buff to resistance (say +30% armor with the nice T2 resists) with no penalty to RR, and a large bonus to optimal. It would become the brick that can go in and survive while staying in and projecting its power out. It would need longer tractor range to 60 KM.
This is to make it the de facto up close and personal tanking and gunning boat, to emphasize the way the empire handles threats. It should be able to easily run 3x large armor rep with a cap booster, or a single one and still be cap stable with guns and no cap booster.

For the Golem, the bastion mode will ROOT it in place, but for that price, the missile speed of CM/Torps should be such that hitting a target within 120 KM will happen long before the missile cycles, also on the hull itself, LMJ should get a large reduction in activation time (similar to how the old bonus suppose to work), also on the hull itself, the ROOM inside launchers should be buffed, so that a CM should be able to hold 50 or more missiles in one go. Reload time is still 10 seconds. Its lock range should be near 120 if not 150 in bastion mode. Make sure to have bastion finish cycle before LMJ is done.
This would mean that the Golem is the premier MWDing CM boat that can push range of 120 with ease and apply that damage in a relatively reliable way. It tanks by outranging anything that can pose a threat to it, and then applying consistent dps without wasting ammo at the enemy. This thing won’t be cap stable unless you slap on a ton of rechargers or CPRs, it is designed to avoid incoming damage by simply being 80KM+ from whatever it is doing damage. The tractor bonus should be 120KM (or match whatever is the intended engagement range for the boat to be)

This is all from a PvE perspective, if they need to be reworked into PvP roles then the scan res needs to be looked at and they CANNOT BE IMMOBILE, and some of all of the above suggestions needs to be scrapped. The key to all this is that each boat is unique and have a different way of fly, the excellence in each race is different from others, having a web bonus on a CM ship is simply a useless function, while it would be massively useful for a blaster ship that gets up close and personal to the target
DSpite Culhach
#3771 - 2013-09-16 19:35:41 UTC
Aimee Maken wrote:
My biggest thing is that this is the most advanced boat in eve in terms of training time needed for a sub cap. And you guys are trying to harmonize them all with the same stick, regardless of the unique weapon system and racial plays they have.
What I purpose is ...
... STUFF


I'd be sold on the idea of having each Marauder do very different things. I have no idea if your list is "balanced" but this concept seems to be the best as far as the fact that someone could train each hull and have a specific purpose to bring it out if they so wished.

Making them all very similar seems rather silly.

I apparently have no idea what I'm doing.

Shantetha
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#3772 - 2013-09-16 20:36:56 UTC
Aimee Maken wrote:


For the vargur, the bastion mode will not root it in place, reduce sig radius and give a fall off bonus to projectiles. Coupled with a nice base speed boost, this should emphasize the use of a mobile AC boat for PvE. It would need longer tractor range to 50 KM.
It would be a speedy boat that zips around, while having some nice projection power, and staying alive by reducing incoming damage with a low sig, and thus likely to either pulse MWD or to use an AB for the speed boost. This thing won’t be cap stable with all mods on, but should be able to dps tank + sig tank.

For the Paladin, the bastion mode will REDUCE its maximum speed, but you would get a large buff to resistance (say +30% armor with the nice T2 resists) with no penalty to RR, and a large bonus to optimal. It would become the brick that can go in and survive while staying in and projecting its power out. It would need longer tractor range to 60 KM.
This is to make it the de facto up close and personal tanking and gunning boat, to emphasize the way the empire handles threats. It should be able to easily run 3x large armor rep with a cap booster, or a single one and still be cap stable with guns and no cap booster.



being able fly the paladin on my main and in a couple months the Vargur as well i love both of these ideas.
Ravasta Helugo
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#3773 - 2013-09-16 23:17:16 UTC
52 Pages now... I'm hungry for something, anything.

People have just been posting some version of the same 3-4 ideas for the past 40 pages.
Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#3774 - 2013-09-16 23:20:59 UTC
Ravasta Helugo wrote:
52 Pages now... I'm hungry for something, anything.

People have just been posting some version of the same 3-4 ideas for the past 40 pages.


Well CCP have gone back to their thinky-corner, so there's not much to do but listen to a lot of other people's even-worse ideas :P
Xercodo
Cruor Angelicus
#3775 - 2013-09-16 23:55:11 UTC
Regardless of what they do with the existing ones I also want a second set of marauders using the last unused BS hull in the spirit many other T2 classes have, two kinds of cepter, two kinds of AF and HAC, etc.

Amarr - missile Abaddon
Caldari - rail Rokh
Minmatar - missile Malestrom (or bounce around hulls so that it's a Typhoon)
Gallente - drone Hyperion

make it happen \o/

The Drake is a Lie

James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#3776 - 2013-09-16 23:56:09 UTC
You know what would really be awesome?
Take what you're trying to do with webs (which is a terrible idea because of the limited range of webs on what's supposed to be a longer-ranged platform) and instead give the Marauders a bonus to target painter strength.
Target painting will give a similar damage application bonus to webs and it'll also work at a much wider variety of ranges.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#3777 - 2013-09-17 01:13:51 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
You know what would really be awesome?
Take what you're trying to do with webs (which is a terrible idea because of the limited range of webs on what's supposed to be a longer-ranged platform) and instead give the Marauders a bonus to target painter strength.
Target painting will give a similar damage application bonus to webs and it'll also work at a much wider variety of ranges.


This man is right. For PvE, painters would be preferable.
Mer88
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#3778 - 2013-09-17 02:04:20 UTC
im training up my torpedo skills for golem as i feel like the bastion modules will favor torpedos with bonus range and mjd.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#3779 - 2013-09-17 02:55:37 UTC
Mer88 wrote:
im training up my torpedo skills for golem as i feel like the bastion modules will favor torpedos with bonus range and mjd.


Golem used to be a torp boat till late last year when torp range got nerfed and cruise damage got buffed.
Bastion is only going to make torps slightly better than they used to be.
However, your torps won't be hitting until the npcs are hitting, and in a boat that big, they hit pretty hard.
Hence why I preferred the 30% bastion resists over t2 resists.
Cade Windstalker
#3780 - 2013-09-17 03:10:37 UTC
Aimee Maken wrote:
My biggest thing is that this is the most advanced boat in eve in terms of training time needed for a sub cap. And you guys are trying to harmonize them all with the same stick, regardless of the unique weapon system and racial plays they have.
What I purpose is to have the goal of the marauders to be “Showing the best the race has to offer, and to shore up any weakness in that method”


No hull should be the "absolute best" nor should it "shore up any weaknesses" in a hull. Every hull and racial choice should have some give and take.

Overall I find all four of your concepts ridiculously over-powered. Plus I find the whole idea of a moving while deployed battleship to be just a little ridiculous and unappealing.

Plus if you want to talk about training time, Black Ops Battleships are actually worse in terms of overall training time, recommended certificates, and they force you to train a set of very specialized skills where as the prerequisites for Marauders all fall under core ship skills.

Mournful Conciousness wrote:
Yup, basically you want the marauder to be able to get through/past a gate without getting blown up every time,

Bastion could do this if it's effect was to allow the MJD to work even when there was a scram on it.

In this case I would suggest that the MJD cooldown is not reduced by the marauder.

This means the marauder would have 1 get-out-of-jail-free card per gate or per mission site. A determined gang could still kill it by re-acquiring a lock with a fast ship before the the marauder warped off (you just need to watch where it's headed and get a point ship out in that direction). They would then have 3 minutes to kill it. or energy neutralise it to the point where it could not MJD again.

In this case the sensor strength should not be increased - it's a pve ship, now with niche pvp application (it can attack until jammed, and then escape - once).

That would make a gank attempt interesting and rewarding for both attackers and defender I think.


I am, in general, fundamentally opposed to anything that's trying to make something "safe enough". Either you're never going to achieve "safe enough", at least for any sort of hostile space, or you're going to end up making something that's over-powered while trying to make it "safe" in the worst common case.

In the end it all has to come down to risk vs reward and on the whole humans are risk averse, even Eve players. Sure, people go into low sec and null sec on their own but they're rarely taking what they feel to be a considerable risk. Either they can easily replace the ship they're flying or they really and truely have a plan for how not to lose it. Generally though this involves avoiding player contact, not jumping through gate-camps and hoping they don't have enough people to kill you in 9 seconds of spool up time.

Also a 3 minute cooldown about one MJD warp per 2-3 gates while traveling. We established earlier that the rough "base time" on a warp jump is 30 seconds, and even a 90 AU warp only adds another thirty seconds to that, plus about ten seconds to jump through the gate and you've got about three more gates before you can use that trick again, and if you're in null you'd better hope that no one has a drag bubble setup on the outgoing gate of the same system.