Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Because the RNI will be able to utilize RHMLs to run circles around the Golem in L4s.

No, I simply choose to ignore it... The vast majority of Golem owners have invested in the time and training for PvE, and this seriously curtails it's ability against cruisers and frigates. So that means running rigors instead of field extenders to even approach the base damage application of a cruise missile-outfitted RNI. You know, on those L4 missions that feature numerous cruiser/battlecruiser class NPCs. The only thing melodramatic here are your replies. Go back on your meds or get them to increase the dosage...

You um... QUOTED me because you chose to ignore me?

I um...

I got nothing

Don't know for sure yet. I trained it since I was in my int/mem map anyways

My position on the uselessness of the Bastion module is well-documented.

That being said, remember how CCP bent over backwards to ensure that anyone who could fly a command ship prior to the CS overhaul could fly one after?

Seems like CCP figures that even though they and their fanbois are trumpeting the Bastion module as pretty much mandatory to fly the hull class properly post Nov 19th, here we are, where every current Marauder pilot is facing 4-7 days new training, depending on their attribute distribution.

Yeah, that is totally fair, especially when compared to the command ship skill overhaul.
Players can go their entire pilot career avoiding industrial skills, but now if you want to fly a class of ships properly, you have to learn possibly 2 new industrial skills.

If Marauders were essential for fleet actions...

Actually considering the balance of buffs and nerfs they are exactly the same as any other ship that got rebalanced. There are only minor differences between TQ and Sisi and as such you can still do EXACTLY THE SAME STUFF with it, without Bastion, as you can now on TQ. Bastion is not required to fly it and do lv4 missions in it. It does however make it better at those tasks and opens up possible niche PvP uses.

The only exception to note, probably, is the web thing but as you can see from this handy diagram:

http://tagn.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/eve-what-to-do.jpg

Incursions are but a tiny, NICHE, part of eve and there ARE alternatives.

Also since you need science for tractors and science 5 for T2s (TOTALLY worth ti btw) It's only lv4 of a single skill that you do not need to continue on as you have been.

And name calling? Really? I always take it when someone has to resolve to name calling that they've run out of legitimate arguments.

1. You can fly Marauders without bastion pretty much the same way like before. Apart from web bonus lost on Kronos and Paladin, difference is pretty marginal. (kinda understatement with Sorch/Null range, but let it be).

2. So instead CCP should have introduced completely new skill for bastion like they did for Siege module, Triage and Industrial Core? Also bubble lanuchers and bubble projector require Science skill to operate. Your point is?

i never said it would not (but you although i seriously doubt your given numbers from your sisi cause it would strongly deviate from TQ)

to my point you tried to make a point with a totally wrong example 150m/s / 2000 m/s would not be the factor of dmg reduction actually the factor would be way bigger thus you tried to make your point with false data so either you have no clue or are dishonest in your arguments.

How does the fitting of the tq marauder you used compare to the fittings of the sisi version you used? EFT numbers would give an idea of where you were on tank (omni and specific) weapon (dsp , tracking range) and mobility (ab, mwd or mjd?) it all attests to your ship handling competence and mission ability. as the correct fit is everything.



I did not mention C5. Solo =/= +links in my statement refers to the TQ vargur in c3-4 of the previous statement.
Also "solo" continues to not equal with links, you mean "alone in the site with links." which you have already state is different then solo in post #7107 (which was posted in reference to c5 though i had no statement about c5)



actually their utility in c1-4 will be of lower value because of the lack of escape and logistics options. when in bastion mode.
Transients in linked wh will have much more time to find and warp to bastioned marauders and find reinforcements to come kill said marauders with competing wh groups at a much higher advantage then previously because they bring both logistics and cap warfare which is the glaring weakness of marauders in bastion.


Was this mission run the same way that the Sisi version was run, and its not the amount on the ticks that are an issue but the total mission run time. also does not describe/state how many ticks were recorded for the mission (which would have alluded to but not stated total mission runtime).

Still lack of posted numbers on blinged vargur, what kind of fit were you using? it doesnt have to be exact but i could go out and run missions on sisi and tq with different fits (as you have) and intentionally made one bad (as it is unknown if you did) to prove my point. Please describe your fitting in numbers that can be compared.

Please also post times of completion. much like you did for the sisi version of that mission you tested.



If by "spoonfed" you actually mean "supported by testing and recorded data." then yes. yes i do.