These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Debora Tsung
Perkone
Caldari State
#5961 - 2013-10-16 21:17:04 UTC
Vendictus Prime wrote:
Simple Solution;

When the changes go live, just let the marauder market tank, don't buy them , don't build them and then CCP might take notice of bad design changes.

For every marauder you don't buy I'll buy two.Lol

Stupidity should be a bannable offense.

Fighting back is more fun than not.

Sticky: AFK Cloaking Thread It's not pretty, but it's there.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#5962 - 2013-10-16 21:20:46 UTC
Debora Tsung wrote:
Vendictus Prime wrote:
Simple Solution;

When the changes go live, just let the marauder market tank, don't buy them , don't build them and then CCP might take notice of bad design changes.

For every marauder you don't buy I'll buy two.Lol


Not empty quoting.
Jacob Bok'Kila
Logrotate Inc.
#5963 - 2013-10-16 21:24:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Jacob Bok'Kila
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Jacob Bok'Kila wrote:
True, redundant hulls are not needed.

For torpedoes raise the explosion velocity with additional 5% to counter the missing painter effectiveness bonus.
For cruses the rate of fire bonus 5%

With the marauder skill per level.
The two separate systems handles differetly. This way both would be viable.

Cruise missiles have such long range, I'm really leaning towards +5% targeting range bonus (this could free up a low or mid slot by not having to use a signal amplifier or sensor booster). With the RHMLs set to appear in Rubicon I really don't see anyone seriously using torpedoes unless they buff them.


Without the TP bonus and any application help you would restrict the golem not to use torps anymore. May even hurt any future chance of that.
Not many use it now even less would use it then if the appication will be even worse than already is.

Edit: Removing the better half application help (that helps torps the most) is removing/hurting the hard hitting close range racial counter to blasters, pulses and autocannons from the hull.
chaosgrimm
Synth Tech
#5964 - 2013-10-16 21:29:36 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:

...
Why having a slighly nerfed max velocity next their tech I counterparts?

  • Those hulls are the very epitome of tanking, through the Bastion module. For balance purposes, they have to pay for that somehow. around the battlefield.
    • ...


    I still very much disagree with this. The penalties for being extra tanky are incurred when the ship becomes tanky. There is no need to nerf the mobility.
    Barrogh Habalu
    Imperial Shipment
    Amarr Empire
    #5965 - 2013-10-16 21:33:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Barrogh Habalu
    Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
    The reason I don't fly a Vindicator is because it is **** compared to the Paladin in armour incursions...

    Last time I checked, armor incursion fleets had no real advantages compared to shield fleets, no? If it's still so, the point is pretty much moot.

    Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
    ...and is **** against Sansha's in missions.

    Rubicon Paladin is going to be better than current TQ Paladin, NM and ofc Vindi in those missions, so I don't see your point here either.

    Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
    So now I will have to fly an inferior boat...

    You don't have to. Pick the best one available. Unless you are relying on ISK faucets too much, market will balance your income out for you.

    Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
    ...until it is also nerfed, at which point the armour incursion channel will likely fold up, since running L4's at that point will be more profitable, until they get wrecked also.

    Please, share source of this wonderful info. Unless it's a product of "grrr nullsec" tinfoil hattery.

    Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
    Dorororo
    Keroro Platoon
    #5966 - 2013-10-16 21:42:14 UTC
    chaosgrimm wrote:
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:

    ...
    Why having a slighly nerfed max velocity next their tech I counterparts?

  • Those hulls are the very epitome of tanking, through the Bastion module. For balance purposes, they have to pay for that somehow. around the battlefield.
    • ...


    I still very much disagree with this. The penalties for being extra tanky are incurred when the ship becomes tanky. There is no need to nerf the mobility.


    QFT.

    Basically the PVPers support this for a very simple reason - they have no stake in Marauders currently because Marauders on TQ are unusable for PVP. Anything, no matter how ridiculous or niche, that adds to their potential toolbox is a gain. If CCP added a BS that could only mount frigate guns and had no local tank but had remote rep bonuses, and er... 125mb bandwidth but only 50m3 dronebay, the PVPers would say "yay! another new toy!" They are not obligated to take out Marauders for fights, if it doesn't work they'll just toss it aside and say "oh well back to our old toys".

    On the other hand, PVE players have invested skill training and ISK into these ships for a specific purpose and they are getting some drawbacks (varying degrees depending on player preference) in exchange for something they may not want. Guess why they're opposing it?

    If CCP had just left the hulls the way they were and added on the MJD and Bastion (feel free to retune Bastion however you feel necessary) then everyone would be celebrating. Instead you get a shitstorm of people either asking for sharks with laser beams on their heads or ridiculous feedback like "a rapid light missile launcher golem tears up frigate gangs (because those frigates can't just run away right?)"
    Savira Terrant
    Native Freshfood
    Minmatar Republic
    #5967 - 2013-10-16 22:10:38 UTC
    How about adding an explosion radius bonus and change the TP strength to optimal bonus?

    I think this helps long range fits to apply damage better and would rather bring it in line with application of the other marauders than making it too powerful, while leaving the close-range-high-damage uneffected. (Never manage to onehit frigs with a Golem, something I easily do with my Paladin and even after this it is unlikely Golem can do that, but every salvo less helps get rid of scrams faster!)

    .
    Reiisha
    #5968 - 2013-10-16 22:18:09 UTC
    Suddenly thinking that these changes will make the next alliance tournament VERY interesting.

    If you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all...
    Gabriel Karade
    Coreli Corporation
    Pandemic Legion
    #5969 - 2013-10-16 22:36:49 UTC
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    Alright, as promised, we are having a small iteration on the hulls themselves:

    [list]
  • Why removing the web bonuses?

  • As we realized when internally playtesting iteration 2, web bonuses don't combine that well with hulls using MJDs to move around or increased projection in Bastion. When we gave them web bonuses we had to nerf them from 10% to 7.5% per level not to overstep on ships like the Vindicator, which by itself was a sign that we were trying to take over a role already fulfilled by the Pirate Battleships. Marauders are not supposed to fill the same niche than their Pirate counterpart, which led us to remove those web bonuses and revert back to iteration 1. Trying to hit orbiting NPC frigates at close range with those hulls is not a good idea either, just use your MJD and snipe them before they can come back in range. If you wish to hit close range targets, the Vindicator is much better for that purpose, as it is tailored for Blasters.
    • The Kronos web bonus pre-dates the Vindicator by 2 years, who's stepping on who's toes again?... just saying.

    Tell you what, lets revert the Vindicator back to its MWD cap bonus (what do Minmatar know about blasters anyway?...) while we're at it and watch the forum hilarity ensue.

    War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
    Darkwolf
    #5970 - 2013-10-16 22:43:05 UTC
    Very pleased to see the EHP and drone bay size issues are being fixed. Also very happy to hear some direct statements regarding the intended direction of Marauders in the future.

    This is exactly what I want a Marauder for. For incursions, I'll fly a Nightmare or a Vindicator.
    Anize Oramara
    WarpTooZero
    #5971 - 2013-10-16 23:06:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Anize Oramara
    Hmmm Testing my vargur out on sissi now. I will admit to never having used MJD but I'm seeing some very interesting things. So far I only have an inkling of an idea but for small gang warfare/ratting: scan res damps might be something to look at. If you can keep them fropm locking you in the 9 sec it takes for the mjd to spool up at max level...

    Actually, an idea that I haven't seen come up: Make the mjd animation invisible to other players on marauder hulls as a role bonus.

    If they aren;t actively looking at your ship and when you are coming out of bastion, they wont know to scram you since your mjd wont show as spooling up.

    Anyways, just an idea, what do you guys think?

    I'll be taking her into actual combat now but the pitiful 6km extra range I get from bastion was rather disappointing. That however has allowed me to drop the targeting comp, get my old range and mount a paint (or sensor damp potentially?)

    Actually with the improved tank I can drop a tank module and put the comp back on with a tracking script. Paint +Tracking?

    A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.2.3
    Nasro Drags
    Pator Tech School
    Minmatar Republic
    #5972 - 2013-10-16 23:14:55 UTC
    CCP should create a new PVP oriented ship.

    CCP should leave the current marauders as PVE ships.. Cause they are the "only" PVE ships. There's no other ship with a PVE role. This changes are not adding diversity or choices, they're taking them away.
    Domino Artan
    Brutor Tribe
    Minmatar Republic
    #5973 - 2013-10-16 23:16:18 UTC
    Anize Oramara wrote:

    If they aren;t actively looking at your ship and when you are coming out of bastion, they wont know to scram you since your mjd wont show as spooling up.


    Pretty sure if I was fighting a space pinata I'd tackle it straight away knowing it's going to have an MJD.
    Tyberius Franklin
    Federal Navy Academy
    Gallente Federation
    #5974 - 2013-10-16 23:18:18 UTC
    Nasro Drags wrote:
    CCP should create a new PVP oriented ship.

    CCP should leave the current marauders as PVE ships.. Cause they are the "only" PVE ships. There's no other ship with a PVE role. This changes are not adding diversity or choices, they're taking them away.

    If this were even remotely true in any applicable sense you would see far fewer players in pirate BS's for PvE activities.
    Anize Oramara
    WarpTooZero
    #5975 - 2013-10-16 23:20:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Anize Oramara
    Domino Artan wrote:
    Anize Oramara wrote:

    If they aren;t actively looking at your ship and when you are coming out of bastion, they wont know to scram you since your mjd wont show as spooling up.


    Pretty sure if I was fighting a space pinata I'd tackle it straight away knowing it's going to have an MJD.


    True, but in bastion mode you can not scram it. This is to make it a bit harder for ships in the chaos of melee of small gang warfare to 'miss' you.

    I also notice that while yes the timer on the bastion module is 60 seconds if you are ratting alone in null and someone pops into local you will almost never have JUST started your bastion timer. You'll at average have around 30sec before you can spool up you MJD/warp out. That's just an interesting observation that people haven't mentioned.

    A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.2.3
    Domino Artan
    Brutor Tribe
    Minmatar Republic
    #5976 - 2013-10-16 23:22:57 UTC
    Anize Oramara wrote:

    True, but in bastion mode you can not scram it. This is to make it a bit harder for ships in the chaos of melee of small gang warfare to 'miss' you.


    Fair point, but I'm going to be spamming that button just in case :)
    Michael Harari
    Genos Occidere
    HYDRA RELOADED
    #5977 - 2013-10-16 23:23:20 UTC
    Reiisha wrote:
    Suddenly thinking that these changes will make the next alliance tournament VERY interesting.


    Obviously bastion module will be banned
    Nasro Drags
    Pator Tech School
    Minmatar Republic
    #5978 - 2013-10-16 23:23:20 UTC
    Tyberius Franklin wrote:
    Nasro Drags wrote:
    CCP should create a new PVP oriented ship.

    CCP should leave the current marauders as PVE ships.. Cause they are the "only" PVE ships. There's no other ship with a PVE role. This changes are not adding diversity or choices, they're taking them away.

    If this were even remotely true in any applicable sense you would see far fewer players in pirate BS's for PvE activities.


    Exactly, because pirate ships are actually slightly better for general purpose PVE. AND they are far easier to train for. The marauders do need a boost, in PVE. Not make them into something they are not to please almost nobody. I've been in null sec for pretty much as long as i have played. I maybe saw once or twice people roaming in machariels and such.

    A bill plus PVP ship is a ship almost no one will use. It doesn't make sense to take a ship away for those who've specialized for it, to please almost nobody. It doesn't make any sense in my opinion.
    Anize Oramara
    WarpTooZero
    #5979 - 2013-10-16 23:26:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Anize Oramara
    Ooh, I can tank these lv4 missions, the easier ones at least with just two decent tank modules (hardner, dedspace booster). That means I can fit 2-3 tracking comps, maybe a web or even a sebo to lock frigs faster.

    I don't think people who are complaining about lv4 missions at least have actually tested the new marauder out with an open mind. I'm getting pretty excited here.

    Heck I got some many mid slots how about an auto targeter?

    A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.2.3
    Nevyn Auscent
    Broke Sauce
    #5980 - 2013-10-16 23:29:48 UTC
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    Alright, as promised, we are having a small iteration on the hulls themselves:




    Why having a slighly nerfed max velocity next their tech I counterparts?



    Why not adding damage to the Bastion mode?


    What's the point of keeping tractor bonuses with the new deployable structure?




    Snipped down to these points.
    To address in order.
    1. They already have a penalty to Bastion. They can't move. They don't need a penalty outside of Bastion. By giving them a penalty outside of Bastion you are forcing people to always use Bastion. Which is not a good approach. They should still be valid outside of Bastion mode.

    2. The current tractor bonus are inadequate. The range on them has always been subpar, and with the force into MJD use becomes even more so. If they are going to stay, they need to get to over about 60km. If we have to give up velocity buff to get to our range buff, so be it. But the range simply doesn't cut it, it doesn't cut it on TQ already, and it certainly won't in Rubicon

    3. While you hid this in here T2 resists. Yet again, these ships should be valid outside of Bastion. What is wrong with these ships seeing widespread use in RR fleets? It's not like they still won't be blapped by dreads like any BS blob is vulnerable to, and it's not like they still can't be alpha'ed off the field. If you want them to see real PvP use rather than the odd high sec station game or dickstar bashing, then this is exactly what you should be encouraging. T2 resists are not OP in RR gangs. They work at Frigate, Cruiser & Battle Cruiser levels. There is nothing about BS that magically makes it break.

    4. DPS. You have nerfed their DPS by removing drone bandwidth so these ships will take LONGER to complete anything they currently do on TQ. You have failed to compensate for this DPS drop in any way. You really need to address this point as they are lower DPS than most T1 BS. The Bastion mode does not magically make up for this DPS since Active tank is needed so you still need the same tank slotted, to survive when out of Bastion mode, and when you get dropped.