These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#6421 - 2013-10-21 08:05:10 UTC
Not sure if this has been asked/answered, but is cargo capacity on the new Marauders the same as the old?

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Brib Vogt
Doomheim
#6422 - 2013-10-21 08:07:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Brib Vogt
Vulfen wrote:


CCP aren't really changing marauders though honestly. They are replacing a couple bonuses on the hulls and giving them extra fitting other than that they can be used in the same way as they were previously just with much better fittings and a couple extra options when it comes to fitting. Admittidly the web bonus was a big thing on the kronos and paladin but they have a tracking buff now so you could cope with a 60% web

I think if there is an issue with these ships it is with the gun systems they use, but CCP cant buff or nerf large weapon systems or it would mess the entire balance of power up. Because to Tier 3 BCs. the only thing they could do without messing it up is a small tracking buff across the board.



The whole concept is just a bit crappy. IF CCP would have said "We introduce more CPU and Fitting potential and we decided to give em the T2 resists they deserve" everyone would be happy. If they had said "and we fix the poor sensor strength and scan resolution" everyone would be even more excited. And if ccp would argue, that with this buffs the marauder need a nerf i would have understood it. A general reduction of 25m³ drone bandwidth to all ships would be a reduction in effective DPS and more then enough to justify the changes.

But no, they had to create a module which makes you stationary, which in itself is a huge drawback. It is the ultimate BS sized defensive module on a ship class tending to be over tanked already.
The Djego
Hellequin Inc.
#6423 - 2013-10-21 08:27:04 UTC
Vulfen wrote:
The Djego wrote:
Since I still didn't get a answer on it yet, how likely it is to just keep the old marauders ingame and make them a 2. hull type that uses the marauder skills? I don't really care if you actually fix them or not.

- the old marauders are not game breaking or created any kind of issue in the game during her 6 years
- in many scenarios they perform better than the new ones
- in certain scenarios(like RR gang or Incs) bastion, active tanking and mjd provide nothing
- people get her new toy that they can sell again after 3 months when the shiny is gone and other people can still be happy with the marauders they use since years
- more choice to the player and choice is good in my opinion
- a opportunity to actually fix the old marauders in a way where they provide a very good alternative to pirate BS hulls(by improving the RR focus, adding utility and giving them unique features like posted a couple of times so far)




CCP aren't really changing marauders though honestly. They are replacing a couple bonuses on the hulls and giving them extra fitting other than that they can be used in the same way as they were previously just with much better fittings and a couple extra options when it comes to fitting. Admittidly the web bonus was a big thing on the kronos and paladin but they have a tracking buff now so you could cope with a 60% web

I think if there is an issue with these ships it is with the gun systems they use, but CCP cant buff or nerf large weapon systems or it would mess the entire balance of power up. Because to Tier 3 BCs. the only thing they could do without messing it up is a small tracking buff across the board.


The issue I mostly have is that I use marauders on a daily basis(I got and fly all of them), and would have little use for them after the changes, since bastion is pointless for me(it slows me down, I don't need the extra active tank, the range and tracking bonuses are eaten up by stacking etc.) and mjd not worth the slot over a mwd and they get considerable worse just for the ability to utilize both.

I don't really see the issue, people that think bastion and mjd will suit them can get them and people have no use for this at all can stick with the ships they fly since years. Having not a single one of the actual problems of marauders even touched might be a bitter result for a balance patch(however it is nothing new, see hybrids) but at the end of the day it is still better then selling the hulls, consider marauder 5 as wasted SP and calling it a day.

Improve discharge rigging: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=246166&find=unread
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#6424 - 2013-10-21 08:29:36 UTC
The Djego wrote:
consider marauder 5 as wasted SP and calling it a day.


If you use Marauders every day, then Marauders V wasn't a waste of skill points.
The Djego
Hellequin Inc.
#6425 - 2013-10-21 08:48:42 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:
The Djego wrote:
consider marauder 5 as wasted SP and calling it a day.


If you use Marauders every day, then Marauders V wasn't a waste of skill points.


It will be with the changes, at least to me. It isn't even the SP(I also have large blaster spec 5 and completely ditched blaster BS with the changes in 2008), what I dislike is that hulls that are in the game since 6 years get geared to something else, what is not really useful to me and a lot other people flying marauders currently. I have no problem selling all my marauders at patch day and getting new ones, just for the sake of having the same thing after the patch then I have now. I see no harm in this, or any kind of downside for eve to keep the old marauders as a 2. marauder BS.

Improve discharge rigging: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=246166&find=unread
hmskrecik
TransMine Group
Gluten Free Cartel
#6426 - 2013-10-21 08:49:20 UTC
Mina Sebiestar wrote:
hmskrecik wrote:
Mina Sebiestar wrote:
4 faction gyros and t2 burst rig...it is truly shame it cant brake 1000(900 even) dps mark.

Even Vindicator does not break 1000dps with long range guns (Machariel too, for that matter). And your point is?


My point is that artys are bad weapon except niche role and it still stands.

1000 dps

As you see Vindicator does 1000 dps with guns only(faction ammo included)

Mach is over 900(0) too and since it uses same low dps arty it isn't great but at least it is high enough with solid drone bay and implants to out dps battlecruizers.

So did you had a point beside being wrong ?

Ah, okay. I checked with tech 2 magstabs instead of faction.

My point, beside being corrected, is that marauders are not supposed to have bigger dps than pirate battleships. Ask CCP if you have any doubts.
Shivanthar
#6427 - 2013-10-21 08:58:37 UTC
Brib Vogt wrote:
Vulfen wrote:


CCP aren't really changing marauders though honestly. They are replacing a couple bonuses on the hulls and giving them extra fitting other than that they can be used in the same way as they were previously just with much better fittings and a couple extra options when it comes to fitting. Admittidly the web bonus was a big thing on the kronos and paladin but they have a tracking buff now so you could cope with a 60% web

I think if there is an issue with these ships it is with the gun systems they use, but CCP cant buff or nerf large weapon systems or it would mess the entire balance of power up. Because to Tier 3 BCs. the only thing they could do without messing it up is a small tracking buff across the board.



The whole concept is just a bit crappy. IF CCP would have said "We introduce more CPU and Fitting potential and we decided to give em the T2 resists they deserve" everyone would be happy. If they had said "and we fix the poor sensor strength and scan resolution" everyone would be even more excited. And if ccp would argue, that with this buffs the marauder need a nerf i would have understood it. A general reduction of 25m³ drone bandwidth to all ships would be a reduction in effective DPS and more then enough to justify the changes.

But no, they had to create a module which makes you stationary, which in itself is a huge drawback. It is the ultimate BS sized defensive module on a ship class tending to be over tanked already.


When I mentioned this by writing it point-by-point, people "zZZzzzzZz"ed on me and found this "not interesting". Some of people here have some interest in stationary object. Only thing that makes it different from a sentry dominix is, IMO, e-war immunity. Nothing more.

_Half _the lies they tell about me **aren't **true.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#6428 - 2013-10-21 09:09:32 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Shivanthar wrote:
Brib Vogt wrote:
Vulfen wrote:


CCP aren't really changing marauders though honestly. They are replacing a couple bonuses on the hulls and giving them extra fitting other than that they can be used in the same way as they were previously just with much better fittings and a couple extra options when it comes to fitting. Admittidly the web bonus was a big thing on the kronos and paladin but they have a tracking buff now so you could cope with a 60% web

I think if there is an issue with these ships it is with the gun systems they use, but CCP cant buff or nerf large weapon systems or it would mess the entire balance of power up. Because to Tier 3 BCs. the only thing they could do without messing it up is a small tracking buff across the board.



The whole concept is just a bit crappy. IF CCP would have said "We introduce more CPU and Fitting potential and we decided to give em the T2 resists they deserve" everyone would be happy. If they had said "and we fix the poor sensor strength and scan resolution" everyone would be even more excited. And if ccp would argue, that with this buffs the marauder need a nerf i would have understood it. A general reduction of 25m³ drone bandwidth to all ships would be a reduction in effective DPS and more then enough to justify the changes.

But no, they had to create a module which makes you stationary, which in itself is a huge drawback. It is the ultimate BS sized defensive module on a ship class tending to be over tanked already.


When I mentioned this by writing it point-by-point, people "zZZzzzzZz"ed on me and found this "not interesting". Some of people here have some interest in stationary object. Only thing that makes it different from a sentry dominix is, IMO, e-war immunity. Nothing more.


Yep, the biggest active tank outside of capitals will have no impact!
loles
Perkone
Caldari State
#6429 - 2013-10-21 09:15:45 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
What's the point of keeping tractor bonuses with the new deployable structure?

  • The new structure might not have the same attributes than the Marauders - it will only tractor one item at a time and while the tractor range will be longer than the Marauders, it won't be as fast (no tractor beam velocity bonus). I'll let CCP Fozzie explain the details.

    • What's the point of having tractor bonuses at 40km with an MJD jumping at 100km? With the current implementation I can't see tractor beams used unless MJD isn't used. I think this bonus needs consideration or simply being replaced with something else.
    Tsukinosuke
    Id Est
    RAZOR Alliance
    #6430 - 2013-10-21 09:58:07 UTC
    loles wrote:
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    What's the point of keeping tractor bonuses with the new deployable structure?

  • The new structure might not have the same attributes than the Marauders - it will only tractor one item at a time and while the tractor range will be longer than the Marauders, it won't be as fast (no tractor beam velocity bonus). I'll let CCP Fozzie explain the details.

    • What's the point of having tractor bonuses at 40km with an MJD jumping at 100km? With the current implementation I can't see tractor beams used unless MJD isn't used. I think this bonus needs consideration or simply being replaced with something else.


    well said...

    anti-antagonist "not a friend of enemy of antagonist"
    hmskrecik
    TransMine Group
    Gluten Free Cartel
    #6431 - 2013-10-21 09:58:25 UTC
    chaosgrimm wrote:
    Your assessment is incorrect. The easy summary is:
    * dmg application stayed the same (save projection in bastion).
    * Total raw dps potential nerfed
    * mobility nerfed
    * loot exclusiveness lost

    basically, the only things you will do better in this:
    * PvE content with high EWAR
    * PvE content that would require a very heavy tank, but not require logistics (level 5s for example).

    Anything else will take longer than it did before, esp in short range setups


    Gosh, those forum rules about quotations...

    I understand you discuss marauders without bastion activated. OK, so be it.
    * raw dps slightly lowered, though on Vargur it has already been lost to me as I used AB setup, so no sentries anyway.
    * mobility is give-and-take. Please don't forget the MJD bonus works even without bastion installed and increased PG/CPU means you can easily fit AB or MWD (maybe even all three prop mods, if you so fancy)
    * about loot exclusivity... frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn.

    And those "the only things" cover quite good part of combat PVE in game. Add to it sleeper sites, DED sites and anoms and what's left are incursions, which I agree they got worse only because I don't want to go into this discussion, and L4 missions which in some cases will get better and in some cases will get worse.

    I don't quite get your remark about getting worse in short ranges. Both Kronos and Vargur get falloff and tracking bonus, which means that even without bastion they are to be blasters and autocannons beasts respectively. Vargur is already there but since quite a time I have been longing for falloff bonused Gallente battleship and now I am excited.

    Quote:
    No. Isk per hour is the most important part of missions. This shouldn't even be up for discussion. This is why ppl generally do 4s or what have you in fancy battleships and not assault frigs. This is also why terms like "overtanked" exist for mission runners.

    I don't see it this way but I give it to you, let ISK/hr be THE most important thing. But it still is not everything.

    And if it is everything to you, then you probably want to keep using pirate battleships for running missions. No offense, I'm just reflecting current general balance doctrine, as stated by CCP.

    Quote:
    You are also talking about a ship that doesnt really have much of an existing role in the PvP world, but one that does in the PvE world. We are talking about trying to add gimmicky and not yet established PvP roles, at the expensive of the ships' already established PvE role.

    Again we see things differently. To me, we are talking about ship which has been given some potential to find its niche in PVP. CCP never stated it's to become mainstream. And the PVE expense is at acceptable level. The most controversial thing is the web bonus which, probably so crucial in incursions, hasn't been as useful during missions. Taking Kronos as an example, with rails you are supposed to blap frigs at range and with blasters' tracking you just kill everything, webbed or not.

    To some degree I sympathize with incursion runners but it's about the only PVE activity which has significantly been "nerfed" this way.

    Quote:
    You say that you wouldnt want to use in large fleet battles, presumably because when you activate bastion you will be alpha'd if the fleet is large enough. The other side to this is that in smaller numbers, the tank is beastly. What you have is a "Can't Lose" button if the numbers are small enough or maybe more accurately: "Can't lose within a reasonable amount of time" button and isnt balanced either. Adding additional dmg doesnt necessarily change this ship from "Cant Lose" to "I WIN". A dmg increase doesnt need to shove pirates out of their "raw damage kings" or "speed demons" title. What it does do is help preserve existing/already established marauder roles.

    Yes, I interpret the bastion bonuses as a means of scaling. The maximal battle size a marauder is supposed to take part in is determined by how much bastioned tank will hold, and how long.

    And they aren't necessarily "I can't loose". The thing is, the answer to bastioned marauder is not exactly to bring more marauders. It's to bring more firepower, any firepower. Which means that small gang of T1 battleships (or blob of frigs?) should be as good at squishing the bugger as it gets. Bring some neuts and watch hilarity ensuing. But again, this is my theorycrafting without having actual PVP background.
    DSpite Culhach
    #6432 - 2013-10-21 09:59:47 UTC
    baltec1 wrote:
    Tsukinosuke wrote:


    why do you not focus on Black Ops "use to pVp" instead of marauders (used to be PvE oriented) ?!? for example make them "bastion"ed so both pVp and PvE community may be happy imho..


    PVE pilots will never be happy because they always want an overpowered ship.

    What we are getting is much better at pve as it can do a lot more of it than the old one.


    For the record, as far as PvE, on OP ship is not what I am after, I am simply after a fun ship to fly, meaning a ship that when I do in fact go out and say, run L4's in hisec, I can actually just stay out with it until I get bored (which sometimes does not take long) and NOT fly back and forth like a maniac.

    I'd love to accept and turn in missions in space, I'd love to retrieve and salvage a bit closer to what a Noctis could do (if fitted with all T2 salvage stuff for example), I'd love more cargo hold, and if I'm carrying too much bling and get ganked so be it.

    With some of these for example, even if running an actual start-to-end time in a mission took longer then in a T1, it would be balanced out and made better by running say, 4-5 missions is a row, and being much better after running 8-10.

    The "sitting in one spot" mission running I'm already doing in a Rattler; I was really hoping Marauders would open up a different way of playing. I did a LOT of cat-and-mouse in a low skilled Drake in L4's and I hear that running a Machariel or a Tengu can be very "on the edge" in some missions, as you have to fly carefully and not get webbed/scrammed, cause it means death, even with the high gank factor, and that sounds like fun.

    I just wished something just as interesting could be worked with the Marauders, in fact, I really hoped that all 4 of them would be different enough in play style so I could get the WHOLE set, and just pull out different one for different missions, you know, for fun first, profit later.

    I'm sorry I'm still not finding fun in blowing up other people, I thought I would, I just don't get a kick out of the current combat mechanics. I'm sure the engine will get more complex, and in years to come, I'll also have a strong SP base to fly whatever I like, so for now, I'm just building up assets and SP's and keeping play options open (market/construction/exploring/etc)

    I apparently have no idea what I'm doing.
    hmskrecik
    TransMine Group
    Gluten Free Cartel
    #6433 - 2013-10-21 10:06:26 UTC
    Tsukinosuke wrote:
    loles wrote:
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    What's the point of keeping tractor bonuses with the new deployable structure?

  • The new structure might not have the same attributes than the Marauders - it will only tractor one item at a time and while the tractor range will be longer than the Marauders, it won't be as fast (no tractor beam velocity bonus). I'll let CCP Fozzie explain the details.

    • What's the point of having tractor bonuses at 40km with an MJD jumping at 100km? With the current implementation I can't see tractor beams used unless MJD isn't used. I think this bonus needs consideration or simply being replaced with something else.


    well said...

    Not really. It's 48km. And if anyone can't slowboat 4km then they have problems outside of scope of this discussion.
    Tsukinosuke
    Id Est
    RAZOR Alliance
    #6434 - 2013-10-21 10:09:07 UTC
    baltec1 wrote:
    Shivanthar wrote:
    Brib Vogt wrote:
    Vulfen wrote:


    CCP aren't really changing marauders though honestly. They are replacing a couple bonuses on the hulls and giving them extra fitting other than that they can be used in the same way as they were previously just with much better fittings and a couple extra options when it comes to fitting. Admittidly the web bonus was a big thing on the kronos and paladin but they have a tracking buff now so you could cope with a 60% web

    I think if there is an issue with these ships it is with the gun systems they use, but CCP cant buff or nerf large weapon systems or it would mess the entire balance of power up. Because to Tier 3 BCs. the only thing they could do without messing it up is a small tracking buff across the board.



    The whole concept is just a bit crappy. IF CCP would have said "We introduce more CPU and Fitting potential and we decided to give em the T2 resists they deserve" everyone would be happy. If they had said "and we fix the poor sensor strength and scan resolution" everyone would be even more excited. And if ccp would argue, that with this buffs the marauder need a nerf i would have understood it. A general reduction of 25m³ drone bandwidth to all ships would be a reduction in effective DPS and more then enough to justify the changes.

    But no, they had to create a module which makes you stationary, which in itself is a huge drawback. It is the ultimate BS sized defensive module on a ship class tending to be over tanked already.


    When I mentioned this by writing it point-by-point, people "zZZzzzzZz"ed on me and found this "not interesting". Some of people here have some interest in stationary object. Only thing that makes it different from a sentry dominix is, IMO, e-war immunity. Nothing more.


    Yep, the biggest active tank outside of capitals will have no impact!


    with MJD who needs active tank? unless you are flying a uber bait/camp fit... u are still at their PVP potential, but it is "used to be PVE", drop it and let it be, c'mon.. and vote for "bastion"ed black ops :)

    p.s. i fly MJD RNI and rarely use booster..

    anti-antagonist "not a friend of enemy of antagonist"
    Tsukinosuke
    Id Est
    RAZOR Alliance
    #6435 - 2013-10-21 10:15:19 UTC
    hmskrecik wrote:
    Tsukinosuke wrote:
    loles wrote:
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    What's the point of keeping tractor bonuses with the new deployable structure?

  • The new structure might not have the same attributes than the Marauders - it will only tractor one item at a time and while the tractor range will be longer than the Marauders, it won't be as fast (no tractor beam velocity bonus). I'll let CCP Fozzie explain the details.

    • What's the point of having tractor bonuses at 40km with an MJD jumping at 100km? With the current implementation I can't see tractor beams used unless MJD isn't used. I think this bonus needs consideration or simply being replaced with something else.


    well said...

    Not really. It's 48km. And if anyone can't slowboat 4km then they have problems outside of scope of this discussion.


    not really. think about golem? cruise launchers? at least 140km range(its RNI range with a sebo)? Noctis best for me, it will be quicker than..

    anti-antagonist "not a friend of enemy of antagonist"
    The Djego
    Hellequin Inc.
    #6436 - 2013-10-21 10:17:43 UTC  |  Edited by: The Djego
    hmskrecik wrote:
    The most controversial thing is the web bonus which, probably so crucial in incursions, hasn't been as useful during missions. Taking Kronos as an example, with rails you are supposed to blap frigs at range and with blasters' tracking you just kill everything, webbed or not.


    Speak for yourself, I find the web bonus extremely handy when I do L4 with my mwd fitted rail Kronos, it is actually one of the few features that makes the hull competitive compared to rail/sentry hype and domi is to still do high damage at close and take out frigs that are very close to the warp in without having to resort to light drones(what is a massive waste of time compared to sentry based dps).

    hmskrecik wrote:

    To some degree I sympathize with incursion runners but it's about the only PVE activity which has significantly been "nerfed" this way.


    It is not just incs, they are in general nerfed if you don't use bastion or mjd(both are fairly pointless for most pve and pvp stuff). The new Kronos does not enough dps with rails without the help of sentry dps, it got not enough range with blasters(and the stop and go is horrible). The new Vargur is far to slow compared to the mach, and you want to move a AC hull, not sitting around. The Golem is hilarious bad as a dedicated torpedo ship after the changes, because it is far to slow, even with mwd on it and mjd does nothing(the moment you use javelin torps you shouldn't have fitted torps to begin with). The only thing that improves is the tach paladin, and only because it massively scales with range, at the same time the puls pala gets nerfed(less speed, has to use light drones, less dps with sentry's) and the use in incs gets the a extreme nerf for no reason at all(both mjd and bastion are 100% useless in incs).

    Improve discharge rigging: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=246166&find=unread
    Brib Vogt
    Doomheim
    #6437 - 2013-10-21 10:29:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Brib Vogt
    hmskrecik wrote:
    Not really. It's 48km. And if anyone can't slowboat 4km then they have problems outside of scope of this discussion.


    Even with MJD i fit a 100mn afterburner. So close range NPCs can be killed and salvaged. but some just rely on mjd bastion combination and then you have the following situation.


    1. You are a close range BS and you jump into the npcs -->No problem with 48km TBeams
    2. You are a sniper and try to be at 80-120km --> TB worthless during fight, you have to salvage after you jump back to gate. Which makes the noctis even more efficient.
    hmskrecik
    TransMine Group
    Gluten Free Cartel
    #6438 - 2013-10-21 10:31:51 UTC
    Tsukinosuke wrote:
    hmskrecik wrote:
    Tsukinosuke wrote:
    loles wrote:
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    What's the point of keeping tractor bonuses with the new deployable structure?

  • The new structure might not have the same attributes than the Marauders - it will only tractor one item at a time and while the tractor range will be longer than the Marauders, it won't be as fast (no tractor beam velocity bonus). I'll let CCP Fozzie explain the details.

    • What's the point of having tractor bonuses at 40km with an MJD jumping at 100km? With the current implementation I can't see tractor beams used unless MJD isn't used. I think this bonus needs consideration or simply being replaced with something else.


    well said...

    Not really. It's 48km. And if anyone can't slowboat 4km then they have problems outside of scope of this discussion.


    not really. think about golem? cruise launchers? at least 140km range(its RNI range with a sebo)? Noctis best for me, it will be quicker than..

    Yes, Noctis is the best and that's why I don't bother with salvaging on the go. Though tractor comes handy at times, e.g. when you need to pull in the can with mission objective.

    But if anyone wishes to loot and salvage when doing missions, 48km tractor and 100km MJD fit together quite nicely.
    hmskrecik
    TransMine Group
    Gluten Free Cartel
    #6439 - 2013-10-21 10:50:56 UTC
    The Djego wrote:
    hmskrecik wrote:
    The most controversial thing is the web bonus which, probably so crucial in incursions, hasn't been as useful during missions. Taking Kronos as an example, with rails you are supposed to blap frigs at range and with blasters' tracking you just kill everything, webbed or not.


    Speak for yourself, I find the web bonus extremely handy when I do L4 with my mwd fitted rail Kronos, it is actually one of the few features that makes the hull competitive compared to rail/sentry hype and domi is to still do high damage at close and take out frigs that are very close to the warp in without having to resort to light drones(what is a massive waste of time compared to sentry based dps).

    I do speak for myself. And my experience is that with rails and Javelins even 90% web does not help killing frigs which are already under my guns. Cruisers and up can be dealt with by matching speed vectors as much as possible. I tried and it works.

    Also you don't launch sentries while you MWD, do you?

    Quote:
    hmskrecik wrote:

    To some degree I sympathize with incursion runners but it's about the only PVE activity which has significantly been "nerfed" this way.


    It is not just incs, they are in general nerfed if you don't use bastion or mjd(both are fairly pointless for most pve and pvp stuff). The new Kronos does not enough dps with rails without the help of sentry dps, it got not enough range with blasters(and the stop and go is horrible).

    I mentioned somewhere else that I do not wish to go into discussion about incursions. I agree they got worst of the deal and I leave it at that, it's not my concern.

    But I can't leave your remark about Kronos unremarked. The most important thing you have ignored is that the hull gets 50% falloff bonus. Which means that even without bastion the ship is going to have massive range with blasters, with Null it's comparable to railguns with antimatter. Without bastion you use some propulsion so you don't use your sentries but with such projection of blasters it's not going to matter anyway.
    Vulfen
    Imperial Academy
    Amarr Empire
    #6440 - 2013-10-21 11:03:20 UTC
    Brib Vogt wrote:



    The whole concept is just a bit crappy. IF CCP would have said "We introduce more CPU and Fitting potential and we decided to give em the T2 resists they deserve" everyone would be happy. If they had said "and we fix the poor sensor strength and scan resolution" everyone would be even more excited. And if ccp would argue, that with this buffs the marauder need a nerf i would have understood it. A general reduction of 25m³ drone bandwidth to all ships would be a reduction in effective DPS and more then enough to justify the changes.

    But no, they had to create a module which makes you stationary, which in itself is a huge drawback. It is the ultimate BS sized defensive module on a ship class tending to be over tanked already.


    So you think that droping 25m3 of drone bandwidth would be worth a 200K EHP buff good sensors while keeping all the utility... now thats some balance.

    I do however think CCP are missing some key things here.

    Personally i dont think the bastion module setup in its current iteration will see any use in PVP except for high-sec station games. I believe the E-War immunity is an balanced option anyway, i think it should offer more like "E-War Resistance" where all ewar effects cast upon the ship is reduced by 50%, and remote assistance suffers the same penalty. With this i then believe you will see them in pvp as a good option. As currently you might aswell just field a T1 BS and if you die grab another quickly.