These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#4461 - 2013-09-30 21:08:55 UTC
Lady Naween wrote:
so.. golem tp bonus or no? it you guys remove it then well.. then it is useless in pvp as far as i am concerned. the tp bonus was its ONE saving grace.


replace it with a 7.5% explosion radius bonus and you end up with pretty much the same result but with an extra mid slot free.

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
The Djego
Hellequin Inc.
#4462 - 2013-09-30 21:10:22 UTC  |  Edited by: The Djego
Xequecal wrote:

What were they "made for," exactly?


PVE like:

WH(where you are better off with better RR capability's instead billion isk in mods and imps for active tanking and the shield marauders could be awesome if they also offer that)
L4(where you want gank and speed, tank is no concern at all)
L5(where you utilize RR and a Logi with cap transfers rather than a billion ISK active tank)
Incs(where the utility high slots come into play and the paladin is one of the best options till the nerf and the bastion mod is completely useless)
Plexing in Low Sec(where you want to utilize speed and gank to get in and out as quick as possible)


Xequecal wrote:
They're better at everything now except possibly l4 missions, and even there I think immunity to TDs, damps, and jams makes up for the DPS loss from losing drones.


They become good at nothing with this changes, they are slow and lose a lot of dps and you don't make up the dps loss with the EW immunity, at least if you have played PVE only mildly serious(like multi boxing it, since all EW mechanics are just build to handicap one single ship and are completely meaningless with more on grid most of the time). On the other hand the speed, dps and web changes make them straight inferior to pirate hulls and remove most of the reasons to consider them as good option for some applications, even with all her flaws(that don't even get remotely addressed at all, even if I did point them out multiple times) at her current state.

Harvey James wrote:
Lady Naween wrote:
so.. golem tp bonus or no? it you guys remove it then well.. then it is useless in pvp as far as i am concerned. the tp bonus was its ONE saving grace.


replace it with a 7.5% explosion radius bonus and you end up with pretty much the same result but with an extra mid slot free.


Since you can't do the math the painter bonus is miles more useful than a explosion radius bonus would be, that counts double with the changes to the cycle time, since 2 painters give you the same result(even a lot better one you use domination ones with gang link mods) while also improving dps with your sentry's at the same time or for the hole fleet if you do something like Incs with them.

Improve discharge rigging: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=246166&find=unread
Galdrak
Interplanetary Trade Federation
#4463 - 2013-09-30 21:17:30 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:


We are also aware this won't please everyone here - regarding their comparison with Pirate Battleships, especially the Machariel, please remember we have stated many times Pirate hulls were due for a rebalance, with Angel Cartel being on the front line for tuning changes.

Thanks for your time.



did everyone catch that? pirate battleships are going to be nerfed with the mac being first on the list. personally i love the frigate like speed that my mac does, shame that in this universe progress here is going backwards not forwards like progress should, i see their logic -make a ship bad and then make everything else a little worse and call it rebalance.

research and development is supposed to make what we have better, not worse. come on guys this sucks on my levels.

expansion?? more like contraction.
Lady Naween
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#4464 - 2013-09-30 21:19:19 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
Lady Naween wrote:
so.. golem tp bonus or no? it you guys remove it then well.. then it is useless in pvp as far as i am concerned. the tp bonus was its ONE saving grace.


replace it with a 7.5% explosion radius bonus and you end up with pretty much the same result but with an extra mid slot free.


nope. not even close. as the radius bonus wouldnt help the fleet
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#4465 - 2013-09-30 21:19:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Harvey James
The Djego wrote:
Xequecal wrote:

What were they "made for," exactly?


PVE like:

WH(where you are better off with better RR capability's instead billion isk in mods and imps for active tanking and the shield marauders could be awesome if they also offer that)
L4, L5(where you want gank and speed, tank is no concern at all)
Incs(where the utility high slots come into play and the paladin is one of the best options till the nerf and the bastion mod is completely useless)
Plexing in Low Sec(where you want to utilize speed and gank to get in and out as quick as possible)


Xequecal wrote:
They're better at everything now except possibly l4 missions, and even there I think immunity to TDs, damps, and jams makes up for the DPS loss from losing drones.


They become good at nothing with this changes, they are slow and lose a lot of dps and you don't make up the dps loss with the EW immunity, at least if you have played PVE only mildly serious(like multi boxing it, since all EW mechanics are just build to handicap one single ship and are completely meaningless with more on grid most of the time). On the other hand the speed, dps and web changes make them straight inferior to pirate hulls and remove most of the reasons to consider them as good option for some applications, even with all her flaws(that don't even get remotely addressed at all, even if I did point them out multiple times) at her current state.

Harvey James wrote:
Lady Naween wrote:
so.. golem tp bonus or no? it you guys remove it then well.. then it is useless in pvp as far as i am concerned. the tp bonus was its ONE saving grace.


replace it with a 7.5% explosion radius bonus and you end up with pretty much the same result but with an extra mid slot free.


Since you can't do the math the painter bonus is miles more useful than a explosion radius bonus would be, that counts double with the changes to the cycle time, since 2 painters give you the same result(even a lot better one you use domination ones with gang link mods) while also improving dps with your sentry's at the same time or for the hole fleet if you do something like Incs with them.


yes i can do the math don't be so rude ....but the TP bonus shouldn't be on these non e-war ships as much as webs shouldn't and they have been removed leaving it on is odd and its out of place and OP on this type of ship and not everyone wants to use up mid slots for TP's

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Zeus Maximo
Mentally Assured Destruction
#4466 - 2013-09-30 21:24:07 UTC
Yet to see how these changes benefit PVP.

"It is not possible either to trick or escape the mind of Zeus."

U-MAD Membership Recruitment

PoH Corporation Recruitment
Xequecal
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#4467 - 2013-09-30 21:34:27 UTC
The Djego wrote:
PVE like:

WH(where you are better off with better RR capability's instead billion isk in mods and imps for active tanking and the shield marauders could be awesome if they also offer that)
L4, L5(where you want gank and speed, tank is no concern at all)
Incs(where the utility high slots come into play and the paladin is one of the best options till the nerf and the bastion mod is completely useless)
Plexing in Low Sec(where you want to utilize speed and gank to get in and out as quick as possible)


The optimal bonus means you don't need speed to chase ships down and MJD lets you reach any acceleration gate in two jumps. Unless you're clearing pockets faster than 3 minutes you're not going to lose time here. Paladin shoots to 40km optimal with conflag! You don't beat that with a Machariel. Machariel shoots in falloff and loses dps. Oh, and it's getting nerfed.

Why would you possibly need billion ISK mods for tank? The tank is so ridiculously strong you can run C4 sites with a pure T2 fit, with 3 heatsinks and 3 tracking computers. I've never done L5s personally but I bet that's similar. Is the hull expensive? Sure. Still, I'd rather lose a 1.2b Marauder than a 800m T3 and 210,745 skillpoints. Like I said, 40km optimal with conflag. You can burn down sleeper battleships in <1min with that DPS, and you can tractor in the wreck and salvage it while you're shooting the next one.
The Djego
Hellequin Inc.
#4468 - 2013-09-30 21:37:44 UTC  |  Edited by: The Djego
Harvey James wrote:


yes i can do the math don't be so rude ....but the TP bonus shouldn't be on these non e-war ships as much as webs shouldn't and they have been removed leaving it on is odd and its out of place and OP on this type of ship and not everyone wants to use up mid slots for TP's


While I apologize for being rude, the painter bonus is just more useful overall(it got the better effect on the target, it benefits more weapons, more ships etc.). If you don't use 2-3 painters on any kind of missile BS you just gimp your dps output, it is not even a option in my eyes to fly without them.

Marauders have the EW bonuses to do PVE effective and fast. I know not a single post in the last 7 years where only a single person claimed the EW bonuses on marauders where OP(for what use whatsoever).

A Golem without the painter bonus would be a lot worse, the Kronos and Paladin without the web bonus lose tons of potential for the people that utilized the bonuses in pve to actually pve with them more efficient.

Improve discharge rigging: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=246166&find=unread
Abla Tive
#4469 - 2013-09-30 21:38:13 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:

..
With Rubicon coming to Singularity soon, we've decided to revert Marauders to the original design for now,
..


Thanks kindly.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#4470 - 2013-09-30 21:43:19 UTC
I personally believe that iteration 1 is going to make them AWESOME for solo PVE.

They will be perfect for anoms, and even better in WH space where they currently stand no chance.

It actually does less to boost lvl 4 missioning than any other type of solo PVE.


Those complaining about their fleet capabilities... Well, these aren't designed for fleets.
Every other ship in game is designed with fleets in mind, apart from say... maybe a specific layout of each SC...

I personally like this... If i want to join a fleet, I'll just hop in my nightmare, Raven, RNI, SNI, Drake, Tengu, Mega, Abaddon, Armageddon, ect. ect. ect....
Gwen Ambraelle
Last Train From Cadspugh
#4471 - 2013-09-30 21:51:45 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Hey people,

We've been away from this thread for a while to let things cool down a bit.

With Rubicon coming to Singularity soon, we've decided to revert Marauders to the original design for now, as we want to see how they actually fare in practice within player hands before committing to the version 2 change. We will let you know if and when we move to version 2 again. We’ll most likely open a new thread when they appear on Singularity as this one has become quite convoluted.

That means:


  • Shield, armor and hull resists in Bastion Mode only
  • Keep the 37.5% tank bonus on the Marauders, no web bonus


We are also aware this won't please everyone here - regarding their comparison with Pirate Battleships, especially the Machariel, please remember we have stated many times Pirate hulls were due for a rebalance, with Angel Cartel being on the front line for tuning changes.

Thanks for your time.

Merci mon ami!

A Pally without it's rep bonus would have been a very sad thing.

Your first design was bold and daring, please stick to it this time. (there will be croissants au fromage for you if you do)
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#4472 - 2013-09-30 21:52:27 UTC  |  Edited by: MeBiatch
The Djego wrote:


A Golem without the painter bonus would be a lot worse, the Kronos and Paladin without the web bonus lose tons of potential for the people that utilized the bonuses in pve to actually pve with them more efficient.


typically the pve i usually do is annoms/ratting/missions and in all three occasions i usually get to a certain range and i just blap the frigs. plus the mjd give me the ability to keep range. not sure why i would need to web bonus tbh.

though i can see for wh and incusions you are not just blapping the frigs... so i can see the loss of web bonus would hurt the kronos if thats the type of pve you do.

then again i guess one ship is not meant to be good at all forms of pvp and niether should one be good for all forms of pve. is there not ships like the vindi that can be used for your purpose?

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Shivanthar
#4473 - 2013-09-30 21:54:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Shivanthar
I trained myself for my Vargur in the past just for PvE.
I have been using it for my PvE stuff.
I will be using it for PvE stuff.

The latest iteration seems good for pve purpose (since all marauder pilots here trained it for pve).
It is important to not forget that these ships are specialized for PvE purposes. Those who want to do PvP with this should go to capital ships instead @ same price tag. You don't want to see your 2B ship going into dust within 10 seconds. Since your killmaill will be much attractive and painless than a cap ship, you will always be primaried in pvp.

What about that useless tractor beam bonus if we are getting a structure which does the same job of T.Beam?

_Half _the lies they tell about me **aren't **true.
Mioelnir
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#4474 - 2013-09-30 22:00:33 UTC
Why start again with the screwed up skill requirements, making a pure science skill a requisite for a combat module, after you just untangled the skilltree?
Project XXVIII
Midnight Oil Irregulars.
#4475 - 2013-09-30 22:01:10 UTC
Now the countdown to see these new modules on SiSi.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#4476 - 2013-09-30 22:10:44 UTC
Mioelnir wrote:
Why start again with the screwed up skill requirements, making a pure science skill a requisite for a combat module, after you just untangled the skilltree?



Perhaps this module should fall under the catagory of hull tanking modules.

Sure, it effects more than just the hull tanking capability, but it effects the entire hull of the fitted ship.
The Djego
Hellequin Inc.
#4477 - 2013-09-30 22:18:10 UTC  |  Edited by: The Djego
Xequecal wrote:

The optimal bonus means you don't need speed to chase ships down and MJD lets you reach any acceleration gate in two jumps. Unless you're clearing pockets faster than 3 minutes you're not going to lose time here. Paladin shoots to 40km optimal with conflag! You don't beat that with a Machariel. Machariel shoots in falloff and loses dps. Oh, and it's getting nerfed.


I even fit a MWD on my Navy Apoc that already got the optimal bonus, just to speed things up. Also it is 30km not 40km with conflag, with optimal ranges on popper fitted amarr ships(like the navy apoc, the only way to archive more is becoming competently static what is bad most of the time). You also never hit the gate in jump range with a mjd(have you ever tried it ingame?), a mwd is the better option(tested and used by me because of producing better results). Also I actually do group pve where machs are considered as sub par dps hulls and not used at all, this gangs completely consists out of marauders that combine extreme high dps and high optimal with 90% webs(read paladins).

Xequecal wrote:
Why would you possibly need billion ISK mods for tank? The tank is so ridiculously strong you can run C4 sites with a pure T2 fit, with 3 heatsinks and 3 tracking computers. I've never done L5s personally but I bet that's similar. Is the hull expensive? Sure. Still, I'd rather lose a 1.2b Marauder than a 800m T3 and 210,745 skillpoints. Like I said, 40km optimal with conflag. You can burn down sleeper battleships in <1min with that DPS, and you can tractor in the wreck and salvage it while you're shooting the next one.


For C4 multi boxing 2 marauders and 1 Logi is miles better, for the simply reason that you relay on RR and cap chaining and you actually can fit max gank. C4 require about 1.3k halve way sustainable tank on a marauder(I know that because I have been there done it and a BS sized sig lets you take a heck more damage) and this is not archive able with plain T2 mods without gimping your fitting. L5 throw up to 2.5k dps at you, the key is to have a marauder+logi for cap/rr and ignore the neuting, since the neut towers are often re spawn triggers.

Joe Risalo wrote:
Those complaining about their fleet capabilities... Well, these aren't designed for fleets.
Every other ship in game is designed with fleets in mind, apart from say... maybe a specific layout of each SC...

I personally like this... If i want to join a fleet, I'll just hop in my nightmare, Raven, RNI, SNI, Drake, Tengu, Mega, Abaddon, Armageddon, ect. ect. ect....


You know there are people that pve in groups(including multiboxing the hole thing) that think this opinion is nonsens, since marauders are very good in gangs, thx to her utility high slots(for RR/cap) good RR resistance profile and EW bonuses(what 2 of them lose).

Improve discharge rigging: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=246166&find=unread
Merciful Deletion
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#4478 - 2013-09-30 22:21:23 UTC
It should simply be Advanced Weapons Upgrades V ...
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#4479 - 2013-09-30 22:30:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
With Rubicon coming to Singularity soon, we've decided to revert Marauders to the original design for now...

Yay! Can you please revisit the slot assignment and assign an extra medium instead of a high?

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
The Djego
Hellequin Inc.
#4480 - 2013-09-30 22:41:50 UTC  |  Edited by: The Djego
MeBiatch wrote:

typically the pve i usually do is annoms/ratting/missions and in all three occasions i usually get to a certain range and i just blap the frigs. plus the mjd give me the ability to keep range. not sure why i would need to web bonus tbh.

though i can see for wh and incusions you are not just blapping the frigs... so i can see the loss of web bonus would hurt the kronos if thats the type of pve you do.

then again i guess one ship is not meant to be good at all forms of pvp and niether should one be good for all forms of pve. is there not ships like the vindi that can be used for your purpose?


First there are lots of situations where you can't catch every frig before it gets to close(depending on the mission/anno ofc). I don't use light drones for L4(same thing goes for Incs), you use full sentry sets, web a frig down and blap it with a close range fitted turret hull, everything else is a massive wast of time and dps. It also helps against other targets at close to keep both turret and sentry dps up. For ratting, annos and missions you want max gank and speed instead(and will use a pirate BS after the changes)

I don't want to use the Vindicator(since it got a **** cap, no utility and is locked between sub par range and sub par dps) and I see no good reason why my marauders should be a lot worse for Incs just to revive extra tank and mjd bonuses that are completely useless in pve 99% of the time.

As the changes are, I would like to see that CCP makes a 2. set of marauders, leave the current ones alone(still unfixed but better than what is planed), introduce a 2. set with new names, the new features and look in 6 months how many people still use the low dps bricks with the gimic features.

Improve discharge rigging: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=246166&find=unread