These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
 

Please NO to proposed marauder changes

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Uncle Gagarin
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1 - 2013-09-27 12:33:21 UTC
CCP someone stopped responding in thread dedicated to marauder changes - why ? Are these changes already decided and players voice will be ignored ?
If you consider this thread as redundant/duplicate please give us an update in "main" thread.

Good:
1. Bastion mode is GREAT feature but not implemented like that.
2. Idea of animated ships while they perform some tasks is also GREAT

Bad:
1. Proposed marauder change is not balancing these ships, actually it is unbalancing them even more
2. Proposed bonuses do not adhere to ship weaponry (short range vs. long range)
3. Proposed changes do not justify to anyone (nor PvP nor PvE) tremendous skillpoint investment nor big ISK investment
4. Proposed "balance" is not truly considering ship specifics. I.e. Golem stays slowest with biggest signature. Signature will get bloomed even more when it will get tanked properly by extending shields. When it will stop while using bastion mode it will get hit by any missile (subcapital size) for almost full potential damage. This is not the case for other ships.
5. Caldari race is forced to use missiles, has no turret option
6. On all ships drone bay is way too small (extreme: huge, powerful BS with only 5 light scouts on board and no spare ?)

Maybe that way:
1. Truly rebalance existing marauders but ban them from using Bastion Module
2. Add another hull (a copy of existing marauders) with new set of bonuses and stats adjusted for bastion mode
3. If necessary add another one like above and balance both groups separately one for PvE second for PvP.

BR,
Uncle
Liam Inkuras
Furnace
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
#2 - 2013-09-27 12:52:58 UTC
CCP clearly stated that they have not abandoned the thread, they were just taking a step back for a little to see how it rolled over with the players. They will be revisiting the thread in the next few days with updates.

I wear my goggles at night.

Any spelling/grammatical errors come complimentary with my typing on a phone
Juan Thang
Optimistic Wasteland Inc.
Fraternity.
#3 - 2013-09-27 13:30:51 UTC
Uncle Gagarin wrote:
CCP someone stopped responding in thread dedicated to marauder changes - why ? Are these changes already decided and players voice will be ignored ?
If you consider this thread as redundant/duplicate please give us an update in "main" thread.

Good:
1. Bastion mode is GREAT feature but not implemented like that.
2. Idea of animated ships while they perform some tasks is also GREAT

Bad:
2. Proposed bonuses do not adhere to ship weaponry (short range vs. long range)
3. Proposed changes do not justify to anyone (nor PvP nor PvE) tremendous skillpoint investment nor big ISK investment.
5. Caldari race is forced to use missiles, has no turret option
6. On all ships drone bay is way too small (extreme: huge, powerful BS with only 5 light scouts on board and no spare ?)

Maybe that way:
1. Truly rebalance existing marauders but ban them from using Bastion Module
2. Add another hull (a copy of existing marauders) with new set of bonuses and stats adjusted for bastion mode
3. If necessary add another one like above and balance both groups separately one for PvE second for PvP.

BR,
Uncle


2. It does if you fit it right.... and usually you fit ships to adhere to the bonus's not make the bonus's adhere to the fits, then everyone would use the same fit all the time. also with the range boost, (on a paladin atleast) you will be able to out to 60km roughly with multi pulses.
3. The tremendous sniping range, (with rubicon) getting dropped outside of a cyno jammers sphere and then activating bastion....
5. Your caldari get over it. If you dont have good missile skills then you fail, and a widow is also missiles so it makes sense...
6. If your using the ship correctly with bastion mode, you shouldnt be in range to use your drones. They seem to have been made into a last defense against frigates

Bastion Mode is an awesome idea, you dont have to fit one if you dont want to... why would ccp make 2 marauder ships for each race... would be pointless.
Panhead4411
Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services
The Possum Lodge
#4 - 2013-09-27 13:46:35 UTC
Juan Thang wrote:

6. If your using the ship correctly with bastion mode, you shouldnt be in range to use your drones. They seem to have been made into a last defense against frigates

Bastion Mode is an awesome idea, you dont have to fit one if you dont want to... why would ccp make 2 marauder ships for each race... would be pointless.

Then why did CCP want to give it a web bonus?

Also, i think ppl wouldn't be quite so upset if this whole change was basically removing the current version of the ship, and its current uses out of the game with the changes they are making to the base hulls themselves.

As it currently sits, my Hyperion will somehow be able to tank better than the proposed Kronos. That should not be the case.

The range thing is also kinda a mute point as there are already ships that 'snipe' out to the max range...a 25% buff to range isn't much in the grand scheme of things. And cruise missiles pretty much already hit 250k with almost no effort, so whats the point in adding any more range?

I think they really should make a separate ship from this, instead of changing the core of the ship this much to fit the new idea and to prevent the 'bastion' from being too OP...don't 'fix' the hull if the module is causing the trouble.

Also, not a fan of the cookie cutter bonuses and nearly identical setups for each of them. I know you (CCP like to 'balance' ships to be 95% the same, so that 'all of them get used'...but sometimes, you just need to keep things different.

http://blog.beyondreality.se/shift-click-does-nothing    < Unified Inventory is NOT ready...
Bad Messenger
Rehabilitation Clinic
#5 - 2013-09-27 14:04:20 UTC
EVE is not ment to be balanced on any way, CCP just mess up so people have to change ships they use.
Maximus Aerelius
PROPHET OF ENIGMA
#6 - 2013-09-27 14:13:43 UTC
Perhaps posting in this thread [Winter] Marauder rebalancing would get your feedback to a more dedicated audience like the CCP Devs?

[b]Fast Character Switching "XP Stylee" Undocking - More Routes Out of Station[/b] Here's my tear jar > |_| < Fill 'er up!
Uncle Gagarin
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#7 - 2013-09-27 14:20:45 UTC
Perhaps. But as I stated in first sentence : CCP stopped responding there long time ago.

BR,
Maximus Aerelius
PROPHET OF ENIGMA
#8 - 2013-09-27 14:25:41 UTC
Uncle Gagarin wrote:
Perhaps. But as I stated in first sentence : CCP stopped responding there long time ago.

BR,


Don't give up, they'll be back as they said on Twitch last night.

[b]Fast Character Switching "XP Stylee" Undocking - More Routes Out of Station[/b] Here's my tear jar > |_| < Fill 'er up!
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#9 - 2013-09-27 15:00:24 UTC
Panhead4411 wrote:
Juan Thang wrote:

6. If your using the ship correctly with bastion mode, you shouldnt be in range to use your drones. They seem to have been made into a last defense against frigates

Bastion Mode is an awesome idea, you dont have to fit one if you dont want to... why would ccp make 2 marauder ships for each race... would be pointless.

Then why did CCP want to give it a web bonus?

Also, i think ppl wouldn't be quite so upset if this whole change was basically removing the current version of the ship, and its current uses out of the game with the changes they are making to the base hulls themselves.

As it currently sits, my Hyperion will somehow be able to tank better than the proposed Kronos. That should not be the case.

The range thing is also kinda a mute point as there are already ships that 'snipe' out to the max range...a 25% buff to range isn't much in the grand scheme of things. And cruise missiles pretty much already hit 250k with almost no effort, so whats the point in adding any more range?

I think they really should make a separate ship from this, instead of changing the core of the ship this much to fit the new idea and to prevent the 'bastion' from being too OP...don't 'fix' the hull if the module is causing the trouble.

Also, not a fan of the cookie cutter bonuses and nearly identical setups for each of them. I know you (CCP like to 'balance' ships to be 95% the same, so that 'all of them get used'...but sometimes, you just need to keep things different.


1) the web bonuses of iteration 2 were implemented due to player QQ on that thread about losing webs.

2) Iteration two did more to change what the hulls used to be than iteration 1 did...
However, I still feel that all the nerfs to the hulls were unnecessary, and were merely placed for the sake of forcing bastion and MJD instead of allowing the players to choose whether or not they use them

3) Hyperion can tank better than Kronos on live, but with bastion it won't
I really wish they would bring back the Omni resists of iteration 1 though

4) The range buff of bastion is VERY good for turret boats.. If you don't fit modules for better lock range, you're still doing damn good. You'll be able to hit targets with more damage at greater ranges due to the range buff.. More damage at range is always a good thing.

5) The range buff doesn't benefit a cruise golem much at all in pve, however, it is very beneficial for pvp and/or POS bashing.

6) the word you're looking for is "moot". It's a "moot" point... not mute...(not picking on you, just letting you know)

7) I don't want a separate ship... Bastion is going to make Marauders better mission boats.. If you're worried about being stuck stationary, let me ask you this..
How many people actually move their Marauder while missioning?
I don't.. Anyone I have ever seen use one doesn't... You lose out on tracking and it doesn't help your tank, pretty much at all cause you're such a large target....



The ONLY 2 things I could ask for are to
1) bring back the resists of the first iteration... even if it's just a balance of what resists t2 doesn't give.

2) Give them a bonus to MJD range, and allow them the special role of dialing their jump range.
This would be an awesome feature that would make PVE life much better, and while making them more effective pvp boats at range selection, wouldn't unbalance them by any means...
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#10 - 2013-09-27 15:07:14 UTC
Maximus Aerelius wrote:
Uncle Gagarin wrote:
Perhaps. But as I stated in first sentence : CCP stopped responding there long time ago.

BR,


Don't give up, they'll be back as they said on Twitch last night.


TBH, I think Eve saw that the community is way too split on what they want.
So, I think they're probably gonna wait till the last minute to announce a final iteration and tell the players to suck it..(figuratively)

The problem isn't really the PVE crowd that has always used the ships.
They're kinda split, but much like any other topic, there's a lot more people on one side than the other.

The problem is actually the PVP crowd.
They came in saying it wasn't PVP enough, CCP changed it, and now they want it to be some kind of Marauder Pirate ship hybrid that has pirate dps, marauder range, pirate application, pirate mobility, dominix drone bays and bw, web bonuses, mobile bastion mode that is scriptable...
It's insane the kind of OP monstrosity the PVP crowd wants to make out of these things.

Point is, I think CCP is done with listening to the player base on this one...
They're going to do what they think is best and see how it goes.

Personally, this is the one time I think CCP is right in doing this.
Had they just stuck with iteration 1, there would be a whole lot less QQ, and the players that have flown these ships for years were on CCP's side by at least 80%, which is a damn good number...
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#11 - 2013-09-27 15:11:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Rroff
Uncle Gagarin wrote:
CCP someone stopped responding in thread dedicated to marauder changes - why ? Are these changes already decided and players voice will be ignored ?
If you consider this thread as redundant/duplicate please give us an update in "main" thread.

Good:
1. Bastion mode is GREAT feature but not implemented like that.
2. Idea of animated ships while they perform some tasks is also GREAT

Bad:
1. Proposed marauder change is not balancing these ships, actually it is unbalancing them even more
2. Proposed bonuses do not adhere to ship weaponry (short range vs. long range)
3. Proposed changes do not justify to anyone (nor PvP nor PvE) tremendous skillpoint investment nor big ISK investment
4. Proposed "balance" is not truly considering ship specifics. I.e. Golem stays slowest with biggest signature. Signature will get bloomed even more when it will get tanked properly by extending shields. When it will stop while using bastion mode it will get hit by any missile (subcapital size) for almost full potential damage. This is not the case for other ships.
5. Caldari race is forced to use missiles, has no turret option
6. On all ships drone bay is way too small (extreme: huge, powerful BS with only 5 light scouts on board and no spare ?)

Maybe that way:
1. Truly rebalance existing marauders but ban them from using Bastion Module
2. Add another hull (a copy of existing marauders) with new set of bonuses and stats adjusted for bastion mode
3. If necessary add another one like above and balance both groups separately one for PvE second for PvP.

BR,
Uncle


They'd already come up with the cool animations and they were always going through with the basic bastion idea give or take some tweaks - the thread was just a placebo and/or to lift out any ideas that fitted what they were aiming for. Pretty much anyone who has used Marauders for anything that doesn't fit in with the new style (which isn't a small number of people) are basically getting ignored.

PS I think the Bastion idea itself is great just not a fan of what thats doing to marauders and that they are ignoring the better BS for it to be applied to seemingly due to having i.e. a cool kronos animation already in the works that they want to use.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#12 - 2013-09-27 15:20:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Joe Risalo
Rroff wrote:
Uncle Gagarin wrote:
CCP someone stopped responding in thread dedicated to marauder changes - why ? Are these changes already decided and players voice will be ignored ?
If you consider this thread as redundant/duplicate please give us an update in "main" thread.

Good:
1. Bastion mode is GREAT feature but not implemented like that.
2. Idea of animated ships while they perform some tasks is also GREAT

Bad:
1. Proposed marauder change is not balancing these ships, actually it is unbalancing them even more
2. Proposed bonuses do not adhere to ship weaponry (short range vs. long range)
3. Proposed changes do not justify to anyone (nor PvP nor PvE) tremendous skillpoint investment nor big ISK investment
4. Proposed "balance" is not truly considering ship specifics. I.e. Golem stays slowest with biggest signature. Signature will get bloomed even more when it will get tanked properly by extending shields. When it will stop while using bastion mode it will get hit by any missile (subcapital size) for almost full potential damage. This is not the case for other ships.
5. Caldari race is forced to use missiles, has no turret option
6. On all ships drone bay is way too small (extreme: huge, powerful BS with only 5 light scouts on board and no spare ?)

Maybe that way:
1. Truly rebalance existing marauders but ban them from using Bastion Module
2. Add another hull (a copy of existing marauders) with new set of bonuses and stats adjusted for bastion mode
3. If necessary add another one like above and balance both groups separately one for PvE second for PvP.

BR,
Uncle


They'd already come up with the cool animations and they were always going through with the basic bastion idea give or take some tweaks - the thread was just a placebo and/or to lift out any ideas that fitted what they were aiming for. Pretty much anyone who has used Marauders for anything that doesn't fit in with the new style (which isn't a small number of people) are basically getting ignored.

PS I think the Bastion idea itself is great just not a fan of what thats doing to marauders and that they are ignoring the better BS for it to be applied to seemingly due to having i.e. a cool kronos animation already in the works that they want to use.


I would say the amount of people that don't use Marauders as stationary gun platforms until a room is cleared is actually pretty small.
Even smaller when you consider the amount of people that actually use Marauders is insanely small.

For a class that's supposed to be the end-all, be-all of sub-capital PVE, they suck pretty badly as they are now...

Even if they're not perfect after rebalance, at least you'll have reasoning to use them over a pirate bs.. Hell, it'll actually give them reason to be used over t1's for a change..

Edit...
Oh, and while they Only showed the Kronos, and it does look cool, I was really hoping for more when they said transformation...
They're not transforming... They're just like an RV with pop-outs...
Doesn't transform...
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#13 - 2013-09-27 15:24:59 UTC
Look OP, the answer is pretty simple.
Anything that can be done to incrementally destroy high sec is being done.
The people running the show hate high sec, and want it gone.

Of course these ships will be devastated, just like anything else that is used in high sec PvE is.
Robbie Robot
Exiled Kings
Pain And Compliance
#14 - 2013-09-27 15:39:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Robbie Robot
Uncle Gagarin wrote:
CCP someone stopped responding in thread dedicated to marauder changes - why ? Are these changes already decided and players voice will be ignored ?
If you consider this thread as redundant/duplicate please give us an update in "main" thread.

Good:
1. Bastion mode is GREAT feature but not implemented like that.
2. Idea of animated ships while they perform some tasks is also GREAT

Bad:
1. Proposed marauder change is not balancing these ships, actually it is unbalancing them even more
2. Proposed bonuses do not adhere to ship weaponry (short range vs. long range)
3. Proposed changes do not justify to anyone (nor PvP nor PvE) tremendous skillpoint investment nor big ISK investment
4. Proposed "balance" is not truly considering ship specifics. I.e. Golem stays slowest with biggest signature. Signature will get bloomed even more when it will get tanked properly by extending shields. When it will stop while using bastion mode it will get hit by any missile (subcapital size) for almost full potential damage. This is not the case for other ships.
5. Caldari race is forced to use missiles, has no turret option
6. On all ships drone bay is way too small (extreme: huge, powerful BS with only 5 light scouts on board and no spare ?)

Maybe that way:
1. Truly rebalance existing marauders but ban them from using Bastion Module
2. Add another hull (a copy of existing marauders) with new set of bonuses and stats adjusted for bastion mode
3. If necessary add another one like above and balance both groups separately one for PvE second for PvP.

BR,
Uncle

Caldari forced to use missiles? What is this treachery? How did CCP overlook this and force only caldari marauder into using only one weapon type? Hint: I'm being sarcastic. All marauders are forced into a specific weapon set. If I don't fit large lasers on my Paladin, well, I don't get my 100% bonus to large energy turrets, nor 20% bonus to damage (yeah, sorry, I'm only at marauders 4). I'm really glad that a Vargur will be able to mount artillery without RCU's now.

How about we put the Golem into a the usual Caldari pigeon hole and take away one of its missile bonuses and put in "+10% kinetic missile damage"? As is right now, the Golem can fire whatever damage type missile it wants without penalty. I have a Kronos and a Paladin, and 90% of my damage on my Paladin is EM/Thermal, or Thermal/Kinetic on my Kronos, and I can't change it. The other 10% is from drones.

As for the shield extenders, you are doing it wrong. You are throwing away a +30% shield boost (or 37.5% if you have marauders to 5) bonus for a passive tank. I suggest you use ancillary shield boosters if you are doing PvP. You do realize that you can put on a few of these, but something like Paladins and Kronos can only use one ancillary armor rep (limit one module of this type), and the ancillary armor costs cap, which is a problem when facing neuts from a bhaalgorn (I tried this on SiSi), and the turrets cost cap (hint, the bhaalgorn neuted me out, and my turrets would sometimes shut down depending on the cycle time of my cap booster).

TL:DR I don't think you realize how good you have it flying a Golem. You can shield boost with multiple ancillary shield boosters, you have a huge cargo to hold cap boosters, you can choose your damage type, and if you fit ancillary shield boosters, you can fit such that your tank and your missile launchers work even if you have NO CAP.
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#15 - 2013-09-27 15:47:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Rroff
Joe Risalo wrote:


I would say the amount of people that don't use Marauders as stationary gun platforms until a room is cleared is actually pretty small.
Even smaller when you consider the amount of people that actually use Marauders is insanely small.

For a class that's supposed to be the end-all, be-all of sub-capital PVE, they suck pretty badly as they are now...

Even if they're not perfect after rebalance, at least you'll have reasoning to use them over a pirate bs.. Hell, it'll actually give them reason to be used over t1's for a change..

Edit...
Oh, and while they Only showed the Kronos, and it does look cool, I was really hoping for more when they said transformation...
They're not transforming... They're just like an RV with pop-outs...
Doesn't transform...


Don't disagree that a lot of people use them like a stationary gun platform tho the way they go about it is varying degrees of compatibility with Bastion and not everyone uses it in a manner that would be replaced by bastion.

Also don't disagree they aren't that great how they are now - although that completely off the wall paladin setup that could double 90% web and apply 1600dps to pretty much anything out to 25-26km would take some beating heh.

But there are a number of people who don't use marauders in s way that would be replaced by bastion and after these changes will be left out in the cold, some might adapt sure but its not a great idea to force something like that in on a game thats about playing the long term when there are other options.

Then again as per my post in the marauders thread I actually want to see a proper marauder replacing what we have now with a degree of versatility - wouldn't even stop bastion being one of the configurations that was possible with it infact as you could configure the basion module(s) to be only fittable with the relevant sub-system as covert ops cloaks are now with T3s.
Josilin du Guesclin
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#16 - 2013-09-27 15:52:49 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:

2) Give them a bonus to MJD range, and allow them the special role of dialing their jump range.
This would be an awesome feature that would make PVE life much better, and while making them more effective pvp boats at range selection, wouldn't unbalance them by any means...

That would be nice, though it would have to be fairly limited - probably something like 70km, 100km, or 150km - choose, and jump. However, I don't think it's necessary, given the greatly reduced cooldown on the MJD - remember that two jumps will put you anywhere within 200k of your start point, with a little trigonometry. The trick will be learning how to eyeball the angles, but as people are constantly complaining about EVE being 'dumbed down' and made 'too easy', I'm sure players will leap at this opportunity for player skill to really make a difference. [For the sarcasm impaired: Actually, I don't expect any such thing.]
Josilin du Guesclin
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#17 - 2013-09-27 15:56:16 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:

Look OP, the answer is pretty simple.
Anything that can be done to incrementally destroy high sec is being done.
The people running the show hate high sec, and want it gone.

Of course these ships will be devastated, just like anything else that is used in high sec PvE is.

This on-going destruction of PvE ships can be seen in the nerfing of cruise missiles and destruction of the Raven, CNR, and SNI as usable missioning ships. Oh, wait...

You're usually better than this, Dinsdale. I am disappoint.
ISD Cura Ursus
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#18 - 2013-09-27 16:55:02 UTC
Please use the existing thread for commentary about the changes.,

ISD Cura Ursus

Lieutenant Commander

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department