Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Two problems with this.

One, the Bastion Module doesn't have a resource cost, it just is. The rooting in-place is supposed to be a trade-off so shortening the cycle time would mean far less bonus. In general it shouldn't be shortened to the point where the fact that you can't move for a period of time doesn't come into your calculations on whether or not to use it.

Two, very short cycle times could cause animation problems.

WoW Sensor strength 12


***edit 11-14

***looks at Vengeance's sensor str (14)

Besides removing utility highs for tractor beams and salvagers this also doesn't work unless you can somehow refit while in Bastion, which would be hilariously OP. I don't even want to think about what would be required on CCP's end to have an active module add turret slots in space.


Then fit a web or two. These are NPC frigs, they don't really try to actively speed tank you, they just burn in with a MWD and then orbit.

Plus no one said these things needed to be able to solo a 10/10 DED complex.

MJD is a good counter to NPC frigs in most cases, although I suppose that enemies like guristas in general can force you to focus something else than frigs first, considering that their DPS isn't really mitigated that much by range. Plus this post is irrelevant to Golem (which, admittedly, already has TP bonus and probably will have a web bonus if nothing will change)...

I'd really be eager to find out how many people will build their paladin into a mini-archon, adressing a fit focused on 7 large RR-modules, CPRs and local tank. Should say I don't expect them to be used largeley outside of cynofree wh-space.
Or the Vargur/Golem as a shield-carrier :>

personal impressions (with explanation)

> Bastiontranformerthingy
I believe there is hardly anyone who doesn't like the thought of a module being avaiable to fit, turning your tech-II battleship into another immobile ewar-immune platform, just that
- (multi-ASB-bandaid) Repairamount should be considered to be worked into faster cycle times, maybe even more than 50% reduction with less capreduction, making one armor repper perform like 1.5 regarding both the output aswell as the capacitorneed. Main reasoning being the high per-cycle-amount and rather low basehp.
- Give back mass! Just this time, consider something like 20x multiplier to avoid wormhole activation with activated module. The option of going into *Drift-mode* was extremely promising in my opinion atleast, being unbumpable when bastioned at 0 speed is also an essential thing.
- If RR-marauder is an issue, maybe reduce max locks in bastion. If usage of an RR-marauder in the style of a not-interruptible carrier is welcomed, maybe consider giving those RR a slight rangebonus as was asked for strat-cruisers on several occasions, meaning a rangebonus of 25% to 100% or anything similiar.
- What about MJD also in bastion as only means of mobility? Could justify a reduction of the defensive boni even.
- If a bastioned ship cannot be ewar'ed, can they atleast be tackled? Else, dropping out of bastion would need an incredibly agile scramblebutton to apply within time. This obvioulsy strongly interacts with 'mass, or no mass'-dilemma above.
--- Overall I believe this Bastionmoduletransformerthingy to be a wonderful idea as it was sketched with EWAR-immunity and application bonus, as that basically makes for a second ship using the same hull.


> Marauders themselves
My biggest doubts towards the non-bastioned marauders is Sensor Strength, less as in it being an issue, but moreso it being an issue for Golem/Vargur, as shieldtanking and bonused mids make for a hard choice picking ECCM. While Kronos/Paladin are arguably okay with capinject, ECCM, MJD and a web - it will be a much tougher call for shieldtankers.
- I believe that amongst all weapon systems, torps are the only ones at a straight out disadvantage due to MJD'ing out of applicationrange by a huge margin. OP sounds like missile-tracking modules for lowslots, so shouldn't be an issue. Else, Cruises everywhere \o/
- Lowslot eccm should be more effective, or should work slightly differently to be still inferior (like +x sensor srength flat, as LG grail/jackal etc.), but amount of decreased efficiency somewhat being less of a hurdle for shieldtanked marauders.
- Base HP still seem a little high. Bufferstrats/HACs suffer from weak base-hp aswell, but see what plates and tech-II-resist do to their HP-pools. Would very welcome that concept of rendering the ship extremely sensitive to it's fittings, especially it's buffer to largely depend on LSEs and plates. Also to differentiate between lineships as *combat* BS with their 9000ish base, and those marauders with - say BC-base HP (+ tech-II resists)
- Especially structure HP, it's all joints and junctions anyways.

---
Pretty much buff smallscale stuff, nerf fleetstuff for them. I actually do not see any issues with them being a near identical ship differing in nothing but type of weapon, kind of tank and a few slots - It's exactly what creates a balanced class, with - due to minor differences in tracking/range/dps/capacitor - greatly differing realized fittings and playstyles.

My 113 cents.

I'm really looking forward to these changes. I'm always looking for creative ways to run C4/C5 sites alone and I'm totally willing to fly a bling battleship around if it gets the job done.

Just a minor suggestion: why 5% capacitor capacity on the Paladin rather than a regeneration time reduction? I think swapping it with cap regen bonus would make it a little more robust against neuting NPCs without making it OP in a PvP scenario.

I want one thing from CCP: don't be afraid to buff them strongly

They're T2 BS's ffs... they suppose to be powerfull and rule in their assumption without doubts.

I don't like this thinking "we don't want to make them more powerfull than pirate BS's"... so what's the sense skilling them and using, when everyone can get cheaper, a loooot less skill intensive and better pirate BS?

If You give them bonuses make them usefull not almost useless like so small tractor bonus especially with MJD bonus... it's just stupid.
Boost their sensors like hell, give them better slots layout instead of 8th HighSlot (again look at Vindi and Kronos...)

Pirate BS's are faster, more agile, have bigger DPS, bigger drone bays, better sensors, better slots layouts etc. I'm not saying nerf pirate BS's , because they should be powerfull (hell, every BS should be powerfull), but i'm saying Marauders should be especially in PVE better in every aspect.

Some idea, want this bastion stationary thingy? So give every marauder 125mb drones bandwidth (gallente will get + drone damage bonus). And cut drones from pirate BS's.
Instead of stationary maybe manuverability mode? MWD cap consumption and sig bonus combined with better tracking and NOS immunity (well maybe in some big % only). etc

But still i think marauders should get biggest raw dps, 125mb drones, better sensors and manuverability

The fact that they need to shoot frigs is why I said they needed to keep the web bonus. A single 60% web will not let large guns hit NPC elite frigs.

Also if they can't solo a 10/10 or a C4, that makes them pretty damn terrible for a 1bil PvE ship considering a Tengu can already do both.

For the time it takes to train into a Marauder versus the time into a pirate BS, the Marauder should be much better than the Pirate and navy versions.

The way I see it the Marauder should be the most powerful sub capital ship in terms of base damage and tank ability.

I would say from the way things look now, all will have either 50mb or 75mb drone bandwidth (bar the golem which in true caldari spirit will only get 25mb). The emphasis for this class will be on turrets, drones are only for those pesky close up frigates. So would not expect to see any with 125mb drone bandwidth