These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#5201 - 2013-10-09 22:27:46 UTC
the more i play around with the moros the more i seem to like it.
honestly as long as you are not going to be hot droped by dreads you are pretty safe...

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

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
NiteNinja
Doomheim
#5202 - 2013-10-09 22:29:00 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
NiteNinja wrote:
Still, for all those testing the Golem, I think a combination of the 2 iterations will benefit it alot.

Remove 7.5% shield boost bonus, keep the Bastion mode 100% bonus.
Bring back the T2 battleship resistances, get rid of the 30% bastion mode resist bonus, maybe add a 5% per skill level damage bonus to the Bastion module.
Add a 5% per level damage application modifier in place of the shield bonus.

Golem is the ONLY marauder with no damage application bonus.

With these small tweaks, someone can use either a MWD or a MJD setup. Use the buffered resistances to get into location, lock down and tank back up while bringing Hell onto the battlefield, while still not being completely overpowered.

And maybe use Tactical Weapon Reconfiguration for the Bastion module too, since it IS a dreadnought mode, (or make a new skill similar, to apply the incremental damage bonus mentioned above.)

As someone else mentioned earlier, the progression of the Golem is going sideways, while the other 3 marauders are actually going forward.

The TP bonus is the damage application bonus, though granted it's the only one tied to a mod rather than directly to the weapon. Other than that it's already been stated that higher DPS wasn't the way these ships are going to go. Also I'm still not in favor of T2 resist which selectively increase tank slightly (in some cases against the wrong damage types for PvE) in place of an all around active tank bonus to all damage types, especially since 2 can change damage types becoming more flexible against different NPC's. Bastion isn't the answer to the tank question for those of us who want the ships to remain usable outside of bastion as well.

Valid statement but...

Thisis why T2 resists will be a better option because it'll benefit both in and out of Bastion. As is, the Golem gets a 0% EM resist regardless of T1 or T2 ship resists, you'll have that hole no matter what.

Painters are okay, but the ship already has an explosion velocity bonus, which still don't do jack for T2 Rage torpedoes, but you can whack frigates with CN torpedoes pretty easily with a single paint. Because paints will have a 5s delay instead of 10, and my 5s ROF, I'll only need 1 paint, and one of your rigs should be a T2 Rigor rig anyway.

Gank is tank, so replacing the 7.5% per level boost bonus with a 5% rate of fire bonus would significantly increase the DPS of the Golem, and its overall damage application especially with faction missiles and launchers.
Mer88
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#5203 - 2013-10-09 22:47:58 UTC
NiteNinja wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
NiteNinja wrote:
Still, for all those testing the Golem, I think a combination of the 2 iterations will benefit it alot.

Remove 7.5% shield boost bonus, keep the Bastion mode 100% bonus.
Bring back the T2 battleship resistances, get rid of the 30% bastion mode resist bonus, maybe add a 5% per skill level damage bonus to the Bastion module.
Add a 5% per level damage application modifier in place of the shield bonus.

Golem is the ONLY marauder with no damage application bonus.

With these small tweaks, someone can use either a MWD or a MJD setup. Use the buffered resistances to get into location, lock down and tank back up while bringing Hell onto the battlefield, while still not being completely overpowered.

And maybe use Tactical Weapon Reconfiguration for the Bastion module too, since it IS a dreadnought mode, (or make a new skill similar, to apply the incremental damage bonus mentioned above.)

As someone else mentioned earlier, the progression of the Golem is going sideways, while the other 3 marauders are actually going forward.

The TP bonus is the damage application bonus, though granted it's the only one tied to a mod rather than directly to the weapon. Other than that it's already been stated that higher DPS wasn't the way these ships are going to go. Also I'm still not in favor of T2 resist which selectively increase tank slightly (in some cases against the wrong damage types for PvE) in place of an all around active tank bonus to all damage types, especially since 2 can change damage types becoming more flexible against different NPC's. Bastion isn't the answer to the tank question for those of us who want the ships to remain usable outside of bastion as well.

Valid statement but...

Thisis why T2 resists will be a better option because it'll benefit both in and out of Bastion. As is, the Golem gets a 0% EM resist regardless of T1 or T2 ship resists, you'll have that hole no matter what.

Painters are okay, but the ship already has an explosion velocity bonus, which still don't do jack for T2 Rage torpedoes, but you can whack frigates with CN torpedoes pretty easily with a single paint. Because paints will have a 5s delay instead of 10, and my 5s ROF, I'll only need 1 paint, and one of your rigs should be a T2 Rigor rig anyway.

Gank is tank, so replacing the 7.5% per level boost bonus with a 5% rate of fire bonus would significantly increase the DPS of the Golem, and its overall damage application especially with faction missiles and launchers.


how do you get 5s rof on torps? i think mine is like 7.3s a volley im almost maxed skills for dps
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#5204 - 2013-10-09 22:52:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyberius Franklin
NiteNinja wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
NiteNinja wrote:
Still, for all those testing the Golem, I think a combination of the 2 iterations will benefit it alot.

Remove 7.5% shield boost bonus, keep the Bastion mode 100% bonus.
Bring back the T2 battleship resistances, get rid of the 30% bastion mode resist bonus, maybe add a 5% per skill level damage bonus to the Bastion module.
Add a 5% per level damage application modifier in place of the shield bonus.

Golem is the ONLY marauder with no damage application bonus.

With these small tweaks, someone can use either a MWD or a MJD setup. Use the buffered resistances to get into location, lock down and tank back up while bringing Hell onto the battlefield, while still not being completely overpowered.

And maybe use Tactical Weapon Reconfiguration for the Bastion module too, since it IS a dreadnought mode, (or make a new skill similar, to apply the incremental damage bonus mentioned above.)

As someone else mentioned earlier, the progression of the Golem is going sideways, while the other 3 marauders are actually going forward.

The TP bonus is the damage application bonus, though granted it's the only one tied to a mod rather than directly to the weapon. Other than that it's already been stated that higher DPS wasn't the way these ships are going to go. Also I'm still not in favor of T2 resist which selectively increase tank slightly (in some cases against the wrong damage types for PvE) in place of an all around active tank bonus to all damage types, especially since 2 can change damage types becoming more flexible against different NPC's. Bastion isn't the answer to the tank question for those of us who want the ships to remain usable outside of bastion as well.

Valid statement but...

Thisis why T2 resists will be a better option because it'll benefit both in and out of Bastion. As is, the Golem gets a 0% EM resist regardless of T1 or T2 ship resists, you'll have that hole no matter what.

Painters are okay, but the ship already has an explosion velocity bonus, which still don't do jack for T2 Rage torpedoes, but you can whack frigates with CN torpedoes pretty easily with a single paint. Because paints will have a 5s delay instead of 10, and my 5s ROF, I'll only need 1 paint, and one of your rigs should be a T2 Rigor rig anyway.

Gank is tank, so replacing the 7.5% per level boost bonus with a 5% rate of fire bonus would significantly increase the DPS of the Golem, and its overall damage application especially with faction missiles and launchers.

The Golems EM hole does NOT support your point. With T2 resists the Golem has a 0% boost to EM tank. With the rep bonus it has a 37.5% bonus to tanking EM damage.

Painters are for explosion radius, which the Golem gets no bonus to. And unless I'm mistaken they are in no way diminished in effect by the explosion velocity bonus, which means it actually has 2 application bonuses vs the 0 you claimed, since the target velocity and sig radius are factored independently.

And as stated, they don't want these going the way of more DPS, if you think you can convince CCP of it after 5000+ posts on the subject littered with people asking for it, by all means keep going.
Outz Xacto
Echelon Munitions
#5205 - 2013-10-09 23:01:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Outz Xacto
Mer88 wrote:
"f you can tank it in an RNI, you could tank it in TQ golem"

right now in test server i have T2 x-large shield booster and 2 adaptive invurability fields. that is all the tank mods i got and i have no problem doing the missions.

My TQ golem has 4 slot tank all deadspace.
The bastion allow me to have less tank slots for other things.


This sounds alot more like a fitting issue, module for module vs the RNI the Golem performs better. Hull changes for cap amount/regen are going to push the Golem further ahead. So my statement is 100% spot on. I do get what you're trying to say though.

Mer88 wrote:
Also, the velocity increase for cruise missiles means it will avoid more defender missiles so there is a benefit to turn on the bastion even if range is never an issue.


I'm highly suspect without you showing some concrete evidence that indicates missiles A. currently can't do this, and B. the bastion'ed velocity allows this to be achieved in all/most situations. I do recall something that indicated current achievable velocities doing this in a number of cases/ranges.

Quote:
My word, that was a lot of theorycrafting and postulating. I get the very very strong feeling that you haven't actually logged onto SiSi to properly do a hands-on evaluation of the new Golem or of Bastion Mode itself.

Stop posting and do it.

While you're testing them for yourself, you may want to stop and consider how having a massively increased tank frees up slots to do other useful things, like allow for painters or prop mods or all sorts of things.


Frees up 1 slot, and allows you to overtank. The summary of your counter argument.

All I'm saying, bastion isn't all that amazing, its not terrible, but again its not some positive step forward from how I'm experiencing it, its just different, and more or less the same end result for the Golem, for its PvE aspect. Comparing this to some previous changes that have been made for things that needed some serious attention.
Mer88
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#5206 - 2013-10-09 23:45:02 UTC

"I'm highly suspect without you showing some concrete evidence that indicates missiles A. currently can't do this, and B. the bastion'ed velocity allows this to be achieved in all/most situations. I do recall something that indicated current achievable velocities doing this in a number of cases/ranges."

I think you can do this on TQ with 2x t2 missile speed if you have max missile speed skills to avoid the defenders. with Bastion module on you only need a T1 missile speed rig which give you 300 calibration left for 2t dps rig it should still give you a 25 + 15 speed increase. so in conclusion you can free up a rigg slot and still avoid defender missiles if you use the bastion module for cruise missiles. at least this is how i hope it will be
Crazy KSK
Tsunami Cartel
#5207 - 2013-10-10 00:01:23 UTC
from my testing I gathered that the range bonus feels very weak and should be increased there has never been a time where I though "oh I should go bastion here cause it makes me able to hit him" not moving is just too much of a penalty for the few km more range you get

rather then having 8 high slots and no space to fit anything in I'd rather have 7 highs and one more mid on all of them to make space for the pretty much mandatory mjd on such an expensive ship that has such a powerful bonus for it
its much easier to find a space filling module for a midslot then a highslot the autotargeter just doesn't cut it

Quote CCP Fozzie: ... The days of balance and forget are over.
Outz Xacto
Echelon Munitions
#5208 - 2013-10-10 00:02:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Outz Xacto
Mer88 wrote:

"I'm highly suspect without you showing some concrete evidence that indicates missiles A. currently can't do this, and B. the bastion'ed velocity allows this to be achieved in all/most situations. I do recall something that indicated current achievable velocities doing this in a number of cases/ranges."

I think you can do this on TQ with 2x t2 missile speed if you have max missile speed skills to avoid the defenders. with Bastion module on you only need a T1 missile speed rig which give you 300 calibration left for 2t dps rig it should still give you a 25 + 15 speed increase. so in conclusion you can free up a rigg slot and still avoid defender missiles if you use the bastion module for cruise missiles. at least this is how i hope it will be


Of course I havn't been able to find where I read the discussion on defender avoidance (I know really helps my argument eh!?), but thought that at or around 11km/s that defenders started to fail, and that it was said to be more at further ranges (assuming due to acceleration).

With your proposed rigging setup, damage application becomes an issue I'd think, especially in comparison to the RNI. Going to also hit some diminishing returns, iirc with your rig setup too for missile velocity, as others have pointed out with what riggings to use for maximizing torp distance. For CM that rig setup gives up 40% missile ER reduction...
The Djego
Hellequin Inc.
#5209 - 2013-10-10 00:09:12 UTC  |  Edited by: The Djego
I finished flying all of them a couple of hours for L4 on sissi.

Overall, with exception of the Paladin(because the optimal bonus is super powerful on laser hulls) all are a lot slower with the L4 times.

Kronos is by far the worst, dps with rails is laughable without the sentry's, it can't cover close range with the web any more(meaning that you don't to any kind of respectable dps at close range with rails) and the stop and go game play feels just bad with blasters(a vindi does the same thing miles better). Overall it was the worst marauder and now it is worse than the Hype, Domi and Vindicator, depending on what you want(blasters\rails).

Golem is much worse as mwd + torp ship, it is currently to slow and with the changes it is a useless brick. Bastion and MJD add zero to the performance(2 slot tanked atm without it) because you need a lot of time to move into range that you will not use Bastion at all most of the time(because it takes ages to get in range in the first place). For CMs you don't need the extra tank if you use mjd, you don't need a mjd if you use the extra tank(you can already tank it fine as it is with 2-3 slots currently).

Vargur just feels bad with the stop and go game play(similar as the blaster Kronos) you want to move the hull(what is 320m/s slower as the hull is currently and nearly 600m/s slower than my mach). As a AC platform it needs to move, the mjd is fairly pointless with ACs and it just suffers from low mwd speed. For artilleries it would need another optimal bonus and sentry's, because similar to the Kronos, raw gun dps is just to low.

Paladin is fairly op with the changes(as expected) since I had 73.5+50km optimal with multis(T2 Tachs) and got a amazing damage projection, plus you don't need to move at all in most missions in amarr space. The lack of sentry dps however really hurts in a lot of close range missions.

Overall the changes make them worse at L4 pve(with exception of the paladin), because you don't need the massive tank anyway, they lose a lot of dps, speed and damage application bonuses and mjd is fairly pointless on it's own and a wast of slots if you fit multiple prop mods(mwd is the prop mod of choice on all my marauders anyway). For other stuff like Incursions, the changes are even worse, since a web bonus, speed and dps are far more handy once you don't active tank at all.

Is it really to much to ask for 4 new marauders with the "awesome" MJD and Bastion features? Marauders currently got a lot of issues(that you don't fix at all), however the current marauders are fairly useful for quite some pve applications and do better in a lot of niches today than what I have seen on Sissi and with the changes, they actually are far more niche then before and I would have no use for them at all(what is strange, since I fly marauder on a daily basis currently).

Improve discharge rigging: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=246166&find=unread
Xequecal
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#5210 - 2013-10-10 00:57:55 UTC
BTW, has anyone tested the interaction between the MJD and bastion? I assume you can't microjump with bastion active, but can you start spinning up the MJD and have the jump work if you're out of bastion after the delay? Since ewar immunity includes immunity to scrams, if you could time the jump to line up with when bastion expires you could escape any tackle.
Jasper Blanch
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#5211 - 2013-10-10 01:06:36 UTC
Xequecal wrote:
BTW, has anyone tested the interaction between the MJD and bastion? I assume you can't microjump with bastion active, but can you start spinning up the MJD and have the jump work if you're out of bastion after the delay? Since ewar immunity includes immunity to scrams, if you could time the jump to line up with when bastion expires you could escape any tackle.


No, you can't even begin to activate your MJD while bastion is active.
Corvald Tyrska
Valknetra
#5212 - 2013-10-10 01:15:06 UTC
I have no idea what content is available on Sisi to test with but has anyone on there run high level DED complexes, lvl 5 missions and Incursions with the new Marauders? How about sleepers sites?

All I have seen so far is comparisons with lvl 4 mission running and considering how simple that is in tech 1 battleships, running lvl 4s in Marauders makes about as much sense as running the combat tutorial missions in an Assault Frigate.

How do the new Marauders stack up in the difficult PVE content?
Jeanne-Luise Argenau
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#5213 - 2013-10-10 01:26:20 UTC
Corvald Tyrska wrote:
I have no idea what content is available on Sisi to test with but has anyone on there run high level DED complexes, lvl 5 missions and Incursions with the new Marauders? How about sleepers sites?

All I have seen so far is comparisons with lvl 4 mission running and considering how simple that is in tech 1 battleships, running lvl 4s in Marauders makes about as much sense as running the combat tutorial missions in an Assault Frigate.

How do the new Marauders stack up in the difficult PVE content?


u can make l4 easy tankable or fast doable, the new marauders i never flown the old, makes both highly doable.

also i would be interested to see how it does in pvp and higher plexxes or incursions
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#5214 - 2013-10-10 01:27:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Joe Risalo
Corvald Tyrska wrote:
I have no idea what content is available on Sisi to test with but has anyone on there run high level DED complexes, lvl 5 missions and Incursions with the new Marauders? How about sleepers sites?

All I have seen so far is comparisons with lvl 4 mission running and considering how simple that is in tech 1 battleships, running lvl 4s in Marauders makes about as much sense as running the combat tutorial missions in an Assault Frigate.

How do the new Marauders stack up in the difficult PVE content?


Currently on live, marauders have more issues than you would think with tanking.

As they sit on test server, I have been tanking full room aggro with bastion, xl pith-x, and 2 Invulns.
That should be quite capable of higher end pve without much issue. I haven't even had to use a cap booster yet.

Also, if you use MJD and cruise missiles, then you can kill most crap before it even reaches you...
Iome Ambraelle
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#5215 - 2013-10-10 02:47:50 UTC
I haven't had time to get my sisi client set up due to work. Has anyone been able to test the new RHML on the Golem? With the TP bonus you can pretty much apply full damage (sig not speed) to cruisers and above with furies. That would open up at least 1 mid slot for tank or utility. A load of precision could be devastating to frigs.

Shield Tanking - Why armor tanking can't have nice things.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#5216 - 2013-10-10 02:55:47 UTC
Iome Ambraelle wrote:
I haven't had time to get my sisi client set up due to work. Has anyone been able to test the new RHML on the Golem? With the TP bonus you can pretty much apply full damage (sig not speed) to cruisers and above with furies. That would open up at least 1 mid slot for tank or utility. A load of precision could be devastating to frigs.


I have not tested, but I would imagine the damage is lackluster
Taegessia
Doomheim
#5217 - 2013-10-10 03:12:54 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
I'd question your math if you found an increase from 199 (or 203) to 249 to be only 3%.


Mer88 wrote:
yeah bastion increase range from about 199(or 203) to 249 which is 25% for 199 and a little less for 203 due to stacking penalty.the result is the same for torps, same percent increase.


I initially thought that Mer88 had maxed skills when he\she posted those numbers.So my base number was as high as Golem can currently go in cruise range, without using a hardwiring (~240km). I derived that 3% based on that number. The calculations where made on top of my head thats why i was slightly off by 1%. Admittedly i shouldn't be that specific or hasty, but the math are correct within the context i thought they were.

"Please add an option to automatically repackage & stack our currently unpackaged items in our item hangar".
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#5218 - 2013-10-10 04:01:58 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Desert Ice78 wrote:
I haven't been able to get onto Sisi yet, so, as regards my already excellently performing golem for nul-sec ratting on TQ, I am just wondering if anyone has figured out:

  1. Why do these ship need to be changed?
  2. Why do we need these ship to now be able to pvp (snigger!)?
  3. In what situations can anyone envisage using the bastion module in cyno-happy-zone nul-sec?
  4. In what situations can anyone envisage using a pvp fit maurder, bastion moudule fitted or not, in nul-sec?



1. They need changed because they are near useless in pvp and many areas with rats that jam.
2. They are the only combat ships that cannot do pvp.
3. Bait, station camping, gate camping, small gang roams, sig fleet roams, system defense, sniping, null anoms.
4. Small gang roams, sig fleet roams, bait, station camping, gate camping, defense fleets, sniping.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#5219 - 2013-10-10 04:08:59 UTC
So, managed to get my golem into Recon.
That has always been a crappy mission due to ranges and at points high incoming dps.

Tank
basically a non-factor... Tanks like a champ

Travel
part 2 - MJD to warp gate and land within range to trigger.
Part 3 - MJD out, wait, MJD to gate.. Done basically 2 minutes give or take to complete
Totured Veracity
Galaxy in danger proj.
#5220 - 2013-10-10 06:12:37 UTC
Please do not remove target painter bonus for golem.
In terms of damage dealing, for cruise missile platforms this bonus is even more important than rof/damage itself bonuses.