These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
#7281 - 2013-11-05 01:16:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
baltec1 wrote:
There is one in the old HAC thread, several more scattered about. We have known this for the last six months, you should know about it if you have been paying any attention, CCP do not want T3 overshadowing T2 hulls.

Considering how they buffed HACs - let alone the new SoE ships, good luck justifying any kind of serious nerf. It's more likely they'll adjust the power grid and some of the base armor and shield stats.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
chaosgrimm
Synth Tech
#7282 - 2013-11-05 02:55:50 UTC  |  Edited by: chaosgrimm
hmskrecik wrote:

Would you mind a bit more number juggling?

Assume TQ Vargur goes 1200m/s and on SiSi goes 1000m/s (with the same fit on TQ is actually a bit slower and on SiSi is a bit faster but numbers go nicer this way).

In such situation in 45 seconds TQ Vargur covers 54km. Reverting the speed equation we get that to cover the same distance the SiSi Vargur needs 54 seconds. So let's be clear, the new Vargur wil be in the same place 9 seconds later. During whole that 54 seconds let your DPS be even 10% lower (okay, that's ridiculous but let it stay, I'm making another point here). Now do you want to argue that you need to chase every sinle rat right from the start? Or that you run MWD during whole the mission? Or that all rats are nicely aligned in a single line so the distance difference accumulates beyond all tolerable levels?

I threw out some estimates for what the 7.3KM or so were worth in terms of end distance. Not really trying to say much other than that it is a nerf, and to give some type of reference to what that nerf was worth... I tried to make the post as neutral as possible to avoid replies, but it backfired and I got a reply from someone who supports a buff as we as someone who thinks they are okay as is xD.

The more specific problem I have with mobility is that it was reduced to add a bastion module that should not be used unless absolutely necessary. Given that dmg is better outside bastion, and that you dont free up slots without bastion, its just a straight nerf to general mission running. (I do plan on using the vargur for a few serp missions: Massive Attack, The Blockade, The Assault)

hmskrecik wrote:

Maybe instead try running some missions in different configurations and trying different styles?

If you have some suggestions I would gladly to hear them, and I'm not saying that to be spiteful, I like the ship and dont want to see it go. AC > arty at distances before ~48km-50km, which makes artys invalid (without even taking high alpha / overkill into the equation). whenever you use bastion you will lose dps as only need to move around 4km before you start doing more damage than the bastioned vargur.

hmskrecik wrote:

Bastion's main role is tank, not projection. For projection there is MJD here.

perhaps i misread Ytterbium?:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:

It is noteworthy to remember we don't necessarily want them to out-damage or go faster than Pirate Battleships - instead, they tank and project damage better.
...
We also are increasing their maximum targeting range and scan resolution a bit to make use of the increased damage projection...
...
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.
...
They are supposed to fulfill a different role / niche through their high tanks, stable weapon platforms (EW immunity, increase damage projection) and MJDs

From what I can tell, projection is an important factor in this rebalance. Mach and Vargur have the same hull bonus to projection, and the vargur does not get meaningful projection from bastion.


hmskrecik wrote:

Seriously though, my tests, I still consider them preliminary, suggest that Vargur's performance isn't significantly worse than on TQ and on TQ it was very close to Machariel. What more did you want?


Either shiny dmg inc mods werent equal or poor angular reduction / not using enough mobility on the Mach. Mach gets twice the bandwidth + a ~9.5% lead in turret dps + much better mobility. Vargur doesnt even have enough projection to out do the armor Mach's turret dps lead, let alone the speed.

What I want if i cant have a straight dps increase, is more projection and/or mobility added to the hull.
Dato Koppla
Balls Deep Inc.
Minmatar Fleet Alliance
#7283 - 2013-11-05 06:16:59 UTC
Mach is just hands down better for missions, the mobility and bandwith play a big role on top of the already better turret dps. I MWD right up to 20km from the blob of NPCs while shooting, stop, drop 4 sentries and lay down 1.2k dps. You get 125m3 bandwith too so you don't even have to give up light drones that you need when the odd frig or two gets under your guns. When everything is dead you can easily scoop the sentries and scoot off to the next gate/mission item @ 1.5km/s.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#7284 - 2013-11-05 06:41:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Alvatore DiMarco
Since we seem to have sidetracked into a discussion/argument about T3 balance, let me just leave this here for you.

This comes from the presentation during FanFest 2013 and clearly shows that in terms of absolute power, pirate ships are intended to be above T2 ships and that T3 ships are intended to be equal to Navy ships.

Please don't ask me what "absolute power" means. That's a question for Team Ship Rebalancing™.

--

With regards to the AC and their "flat damage curve" I can tell you as a projectile pilot that once you go about halfway into your falloff you're better off opening the window and shooting insults at the enemy. That's why I keep saying the Vargur needs a better optimal bonus than falloff - Projectile weapons already have so much falloff that you're going to get quite a lot of it no matter what bonus you give it, but optimal is so small that it needs a stronger bonus to achieve the same effect. Only increasing your effective range by ~10km does not strike me as "specializing in projection".

Before you ask, I've been running L4s in a Loki ever since we even had Lokis to run L4s in. You learn really quickly how terrible your DPS is with ACs in deep falloff.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#7285 - 2013-11-05 07:11:58 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
There is one in the old HAC thread, several more scattered about. We have known this for the last six months, you should know about it if you have been paying any attention, CCP do not want T3 overshadowing T2 hulls.

Considering how they buffed HACs - let alone the new SoE ships, good luck justifying any kind of serious nerf. It's more likely they'll adjust the power grid and some of the base armor and shield stats.


They will defiantly be losing the battleship class tanks.
Debora Tsung
Perkone
Caldari State
#7286 - 2013-11-05 08:10:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Debora Tsung
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
CCP have stated they will fall between T1 and T2 so a big nerf is inevitable.

I'd love to see that quote.


It's a picture, admittedly but it's also CCP's statement on how they want the power level of the various ships to be. Have fun reading it.

Da Quote

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
#7287 - 2013-11-05 08:12:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Alvatore DiMarco
Debora Tsung wrote:
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
CCP have stated they will fall between T1 and T2 so a big nerf is inevitable.

I'd love to see that quote.


It's a puicture, admittedly but it's also CCP's statement on how they want the power level of the various ships to be. Have fun reading it.

Da Quote


Ah, but yours is from June 2012 and out of date. Have a new one, from Fanfest 2013.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#7288 - 2013-11-05 08:13:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
Since we seem to have sidetracked into a discussion/argument about T3 balance, let me just leave this here for you.

This comes from the presentation during FanFest 2013 and clearly shows that in terms of absolute power, pirate ships are intended to be above T2 ships and that T3 ships are intended to be equal to Navy ships.

Please don't ask me what "absolute power" means. That's a question for Team Ship Rebalancing™.

Just a momentary detour… I'm not sure if you can necessarily equate "absolute power" with "improvement". If this is viewed as a pyramid, I see Pirate, T2 and T3 all on opposite ends of the spectrum - with Navy in the middle. I think the only thing you can take away from this is that everything is superior to T1. This was also pre-HAC and command ship rebalance, and pre-SoE ships.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#7289 - 2013-11-05 08:17:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Alvatore DiMarco
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
Since we seem to have sidetracked into a discussion/argument about T3 balance, let me just leave this here for you.

This comes from the presentation during FanFest 2013 and clearly shows that in terms of absolute power, pirate ships are intended to be above T2 ships and that T3 ships are intended to be equal to Navy ships.

Please don't ask me what "absolute power" means. That's a question for Team Ship Rebalancing™.

Just a momentary detour… I'm not sure if you can necessarily equate "absolute power" with "improvement". If this is viewed as a pyramid, I see Pirate, T2 and T3 all on opposite ends of the spectrum - with Navy in the middle. I think the only thing you can take away from this is that everything is superior to T1. This was also pre-HAC and command ship rebalance, and pre-SoE ships.


Fortunately, it's a graph and not a pyramid. It's also the chart that they're using for the HAC and CS rebalance as well as the for the new Pirate ships.

I seriously doubt that they change the chart every single time they touch a ship class.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#7290 - 2013-11-05 08:24:44 UTC
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
Fortunately, it's a graph and not a pyramid. It's also the chart that they're using for the HAC and CS rebalance as well as the for the new Pirate ships.

I seriously doubt that they change the chart every single time they touch a ship class.

I can't tell from the chart if this is where things are, or if this is where they're headed.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Debora Tsung
Perkone
Caldari State
#7291 - 2013-11-05 08:27:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Debora Tsung
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
Debora Tsung wrote:
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
CCP have stated they will fall between T1 and T2 so a big nerf is inevitable.

I'd love to see that quote.


It's a puicture, admittedly but it's also CCP's statement on how they want the power level of the various ships to be. Have fun reading it.

Da Quote


Ah, but yours is from June 2012 and out of date. Have a new one, from Fanfest 2013.


Lol, the only thing that didn't change in that picture is T1, T2* and T3. xD

*Edit

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
#7292 - 2013-11-05 08:36:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Alvatore DiMarco
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
Fortunately, it's a graph and not a pyramid. It's also the chart that they're using for the HAC and CS rebalance as well as the for the new Pirate ships.

I seriously doubt that they change the chart every single time they touch a ship class.

I can't tell from the chart if this is where things are, or if this is where they're headed.


This is how they envision that the ships should be in relation to each other, so that would classify it as "where they're headed".

I went ahead and dug up the video. It's already aligned to the very beginning of the relevant part:

Ship Rebalancing: Tech Clarification
Shivanthar
#7293 - 2013-11-05 09:01:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Shivanthar
chaosgrimm wrote:

At any rate, i tried to quit this thread, but i think i may just have to settle for limiting my activity. That being said, i wont do the actual numbers compare when a MJD becomes > MWD, but I would imaging that number would be higher than 60KM as at 50KM the MWD obviously wins, but the MJD essentially requires 2 aligns, 1 for the jump and a 180 turn after you jump. Regardless of comparing prop, I think throughout the thread the argument for a vargur buff of some sort has been made very clear.

Also just some other stuff about terrible vargur prop:

A) we should avoid bastion when possible as it doesn't offer projection that comes anywhere close to compensating for the lack of mobility

B) If you need a MJD, go dual prop

C) to go dual prop, you either need to lower projection by replacing a TC, or free a tanking slot via bastion, at which point see Point A.

The ship is worse off than it was in TQ... the gap between the vargur and the mach increased with the new looting structure. Unfortunately, i do not anticipate a change and do not anticipate another dev response before Nov 19, I will just hope the nerf to the mach is gracious.... Gallente BS V added to skill queue. RIP vargur (11/19/13) Sad


Hahahahahahaha! (-^.O-) (Evil maniac laugh with evil look)

Chaos, we are loosing this battle mate. But, anyway, I don't feel bad for this, because I fought pretty well and long enough with my ideas, with my support to mobile play, with my anti-support to mael-domi breed.

Our ideas have no more shield left. They have no more armor left. While hull is getting lowered to last bit of it, along with ringing alarms everywhere, a nice glimpse in my face turns into enjoyment of loosing a billions-of-worth-hull, with an experienced emotion on my face, knowing that opposition thinks that they guaranteed a nice kill, without knowing that I've already aligned and half of my cap still left for overheated boosting and turning situation upside down.

They'll never, ever be able to experience this anymore after 19th with their stunning marauders, they'll forget what shield alarm is, what armor alarm is, what HULL alarm is, with all content laying dead 50-100km ahead of them. All things come down to the numbers, forgetting the gameplay they want has already been exists in game for years with other ships. Immersion is lost a little bit more, and all come down to numbers and staying away from enemy, exchanging another slot for more tracking and killing fast, 100km ahead. Yet, forgetting Marauders were meant to be a close-range and people who have been happy with them trained them to enjoy close-range warfare. (Maybe golem could be an exception)

Arguing to adapt to long-range play from now on, which is out of question for already-available-playstyle of Marauders, will leave close-range players like me to train for another **** that is waiting to get nerfed in the future, yet throwing hundreds of hours of training to go into the garbage.

No, they don't understand this, they won't understand it. All they care is hitting objects 100km ahead, while won't caring about stuff nearby, they can jump another 100km to open the gap anyway. Less worries, less risk, easier gameplay...

_Half _the lies they tell about me **aren't **true.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#7294 - 2013-11-05 09:11:43 UTC
I get amazed how many peopel do not KNOW how to pilot their ships. The point of vargur speed is not simply to get from point a to point B. Its to MATCH cruisers speed and transversal ZEROING their transversal, amplifying a LOT your DPS.


Also amazing how some of the peopel here saying the base 15ms speed reduction means nothing, were a few months ago screaming for neerf winamtar in every thread because they were 20-25 ms faster than other races. Double standards? or short memory?

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Shivanthar
#7295 - 2013-11-05 09:20:59 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
I get amazed how many peopel do not KNOW how to pilot their ships. The point of vargur speed is not simply to get from point a to point B. Its to MATCH cruisers speed and transversal ZEROING their transversal, amplifying a LOT your DPS.


Also amazing how some of the peopel here saying the base 15ms speed reduction means nothing, were a few months ago screaming for neerf winamtar in every thread because they were 20-25 ms faster than other races. Double standards? or short memory?


Just look at the post, before yours. You'll see the pattern there ;) I am good to hear that still rare amount of people knows why there is a good speed in Vargur, when even devs have forgotten it.

_Half _the lies they tell about me **aren't **true.
Anize Oramara
WarpTooZero
#7296 - 2013-11-05 10:01:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Anize Oramara
Shivanthar wrote:

Hahahahahahaha! (-^.O-) (Evil maniac laugh with evil look)

Chaos, we are loosing this battle mate. But, anyway, I don't feel bad for this, because I fought pretty well and long enough with my ideas, with my support to mobile play, with my anti-support to mael-domi breed.

Our ideas have no more shield left. They have no more armor left. While hull is getting lowered to last bit of it, along with ringing alarms everywhere, a nice glimpse in my face turns into enjoyment of loosing a billions-of-worth-hull, with an experienced emotion on my face, knowing that opposition thinks that they guaranteed a nice kill, without knowing that I've already aligned and half of my cap still left for overheated boosting and turning situation upside down.

They'll never, ever be able to experience this anymore after 19th with their stunning marauders, they'll forget what shield alarm is, what armor alarm is, what HULL alarm is, with all content laying dead 50-100km ahead of them. All things come down to the numbers, forgetting the gameplay they want has already been exists in game for years with other ships. Immersion is lost a little bit more, and all come down to numbers and staying away from enemy, exchanging another slot for more tracking and killing fast, 100km ahead. Yet, forgetting Marauders were meant to be a close-range and people who have been happy with them trained them to enjoy close-range warfare. (Maybe golem could be an exception)

Arguing to adapt to long-range play from now on, which is out of question for already-available-playstyle of Marauders, will leave close-range players like me to train for another **** that is waiting to get nerfed in the future, yet throwing hundreds of hours of training to go into the garbage.

No, they don't understand this, they won't understand it. All they care is hitting objects 100km ahead, while won't caring about stuff nearby, they can jump another 100km to open the gap anyway. Less worries, less risk, easier gameplay...

Dat drama Big smile

A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.2.3
Shivanthar
#7297 - 2013-11-05 11:11:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Shivanthar
Anize Oramara wrote:
Shivanthar wrote:

Hahahahahahaha! (-^.O-) (Evil maniac laugh with evil look)

Chaos, we are loosing this battle mate. But, anyway, I don't feel bad for this, because I fought pretty well and long enough with my ideas, with my support to mobile play, with my anti-support to mael-domi breed.

Our ideas have no more shield left. They have no more armor left. While hull is getting lowered to last bit of it, along with ringing alarms everywhere, a nice glimpse in my face turns into enjoyment of loosing a billions-of-worth-hull, with an experienced emotion on my face, knowing that opposition thinks that they guaranteed a nice kill, without knowing that I've already aligned and half of my cap still left for overheated boosting and turning situation upside down.

They'll never, ever be able to experience this anymore after 19th with their stunning marauders, they'll forget what shield alarm is, what armor alarm is, what HULL alarm is, with all content laying dead 50-100km ahead of them. All things come down to the numbers, forgetting the gameplay they want has already been exists in game for years with other ships. Immersion is lost a little bit more, and all come down to numbers and staying away from enemy, exchanging another slot for more tracking and killing fast, 100km ahead. Yet, forgetting Marauders were meant to be a close-range and people who have been happy with them trained them to enjoy close-range warfare. (Maybe golem could be an exception)

Arguing to adapt to long-range play from now on, which is out of question for already-available-playstyle of Marauders, will leave close-range players like me to train for another **** that is waiting to get nerfed in the future, yet throwing hundreds of hours of training to go into the garbage.

No, they don't understand this, they won't understand it. All they care is hitting objects 100km ahead, while won't caring about stuff nearby, they can jump another 100km to open the gap anyway. Less worries, less risk, easier gameplay...

Dat drama Big smile


Ugh It is for sure that what I'll be doing as a Vargur pilot will be called as a good drama. There is still some hope left. Still two more weeks to go. Maybe they'll revise, maybe they'll completely revert and create another shipline with bastion's bonuses as a base bonus or maybe they'll just revert all changes and apply some fixes to marauder hulls as general including revisiting some bonuses and tr. beam ranges.

Don't misunderstand me! The danger of Marauders being ****** up is very real, but fearing from it is only a choice. Don Quixote versus mill is my long-time-inspiration anyway! Cool

_Half _the lies they tell about me **aren't **true.
Dav Varan
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#7298 - 2013-11-05 12:55:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Dav Varan
CCP Ytterbium wrote:


BASTION MODULE

  • Increases shield and armor repair amount by 100%
  • Boosts all shields, armor and hull resistances by 30%
  • Extends all large turret falloff and optimal by 25%
  • Increases all large missile max velocity by 25%


    • GOLEM


    Role Bonus: 100% bonus to cruise missile and torpedo damage, 100% bonus to range and velocity of tractor beams, 70% reduction in Micro Jump Drive reactivation delay

    Caldari Battleship Skill Bonus: 10% bonus to cruise missile and torpedo velocity
    5% bonus to cruise missile and torpedo explosion velocity per level



    With the introduction of Rapid heavy missile launchers as a choice on BS Hulls
    Can you include Heavy missiles in the bastion and Golem boosts.
    baltec1
    Bat Country
    Pandemic Horde
    #7299 - 2013-11-05 13:11:27 UTC
    Dav Varan wrote:

    With the introduction of Rapid heavy missile launchers as a choice on BS Hulls
    Can you include Heavy missiles in the bastion and Golem boosts.


    They want you to have a reason to fly the other BS.Blink
    Kane Fenris
    NWP
    #7300 - 2013-11-05 13:16:24 UTC
    Dav Varan wrote:
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:


    BASTION MODULE

  • Increases shield and armor repair amount by 100%
  • Boosts all shields, armor and hull resistances by 30%
  • Extends all large turret falloff and optimal by 25%
  • Increases all large missile max velocity by 25%


    • GOLEM


    Role Bonus: 100% bonus to cruise missile and torpedo damage, 100% bonus to range and velocity of tractor beams, 70% reduction in Micro Jump Drive reactivation delay

    Caldari Battleship Skill Bonus: 10% bonus to cruise missile and torpedo velocity
    5% bonus to cruise missile and torpedo explosion velocity per level



    With the introduction of Rapid heavy missile launchers as a choice on BS Hulls
    Can you include Heavy missiles in the bastion and Golem boosts.


    you obvisually did not read anything about RHML did you?