These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Kane Fenris
NWP
#7361 - 2013-11-06 22:15:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Kane Fenris
Anize Oramara wrote:

People do it all the time. You tell me what to buy form the LP store, I contract them to you for the agreed price, bam lp sold.

What do you get for your LP anyways?

Although on the other hand discussing Mission blitzing/LP farming has zero place in a marauder rebalanced thread. If you lp farm then you are sure as hell not running a marauder. A Pirate BS is far better at it, as it should be.


its about beeing efficient.

if a mission is more worth "blitzed" than not it is too in a marauder.

some missions are best farmed if you shoot and salvage only the valuable bs and blitz the rest.
this is where marauders shine if you shoot all the things and salvage all the thing youd better have an alt with a noctis .

so theres why it concerns marauders.

ps.: what i get depends what its offerd, what sells best and what has the best lp to isk ratio.... so no simple answer here

if somebody has an awnser to tractorunit pullable? that would be great
Mina Sebiestar
Minmatar Inner Space Conglomerate
#7362 - 2013-11-06 22:46:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Mina Sebiestar
Anize Oramara wrote:
Mina Sebiestar wrote:
I didn't said gizmo for bastion I said it for salvage


in case you didn't notice ....

You don't translate to same as me

And some does not translate to everybody

what you do and can't do or is hard is your perspective,and it doesn't translate to everybody else,I can comment on you salvage operations because that to is situational and mission specific ie gizmo....

If you want comparison do combat comparison in between marauders and or rest of high end ships in one thing that all do..shooting stuff.

If you did salvage while you shoot what exactly did you do in mission for over half and hour I don't know.

Yea theres definitely some translation problems here. You're using the wrong words for stuff. It's not gizmo, I think you meant gimmick though it isn't a gimmick for the marauder since that is usually the primary way it gets isk, through loot and salvage. not taking that into account would be like not taking LP into account for mission blitzers.

Understand this very clearly: Marauders are not, and never will be Pirate BS. They do not work the same, they do not run missions the same, they do not make isk the same way.

The only thing really is if they make roughly the same amount of isk per hour and with bastion + salvage + MJD they make more than I can currently on TQ.


We'll I definitely don't think of salvaging as empty trick or useless endeavor but saying it is primary way earning isk is silly.

Same as pirate and other high end ships primary way of them earning isk is shooting stuff,it is rather simple if your bonuses are 90% dmg oriented it is usually good idea to shoot stuff.

Now that is not to say you can't fit salvagers on non bonuses hull to salvage you can and it is great you do but if price for that is staying more than twice amount you need to complete mission...well it might not be primary way of making isk isn't it.

No need to compare performance to any other ship you your self can be on even grounds in Isk/h if you know what are you doing,and let's not forget while another agent might not hit me with same mission it sure as hell won't hit you with another blockade.

More to the point if it so important part of marauders I am sure CCP will not shaft tractor range and add salvage boost..right.

It is so un fair that CCP nerfed dose ships for so long because they could fit salvagers in that high slots and not massive rr/neut/bombs.

Also in the realm of "other things than missions"....I know eve haz those too...ppl are using marauders to roll billions without fitting single salvager!!!! Crazy!!
Il notify them that they are doing it wrong and send them back to l4 running Aldo after patch when these ships turning into glorified diapers maybe they will have to.

One last thing whole this thread is they being to similar to pirate ships almost same...tracking boost there instead of tank boost here etc...so your marauders are not same as pirate ships will have to wait after rubicon hits..soon.

You choke behind a smile a fake behind the fear

Because >>I is too hard
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#7363 - 2013-11-06 23:01:38 UTC
Mina Sebiestar wrote:
Anize Oramara wrote:
Mina Sebiestar wrote:
I didn't said gizmo for bastion I said it for salvage


in case you didn't notice ....

You don't translate to same as me

And some does not translate to everybody

what you do and can't do or is hard is your perspective,and it doesn't translate to everybody else,I can comment on you salvage operations because that to is situational and mission specific ie gizmo....

If you want comparison do combat comparison in between marauders and or rest of high end ships in one thing that all do..shooting stuff.

If you did salvage while you shoot what exactly did you do in mission for over half and hour I don't know.

Yea theres definitely some translation problems here. You're using the wrong words for stuff. It's not gizmo, I think you meant gimmick though it isn't a gimmick for the marauder since that is usually the primary way it gets isk, through loot and salvage. not taking that into account would be like not taking LP into account for mission blitzers.

Understand this very clearly: Marauders are not, and never will be Pirate BS. They do not work the same, they do not run missions the same, they do not make isk the same way.

The only thing really is if they make roughly the same amount of isk per hour and with bastion + salvage + MJD they make more than I can currently on TQ.


We'll I definitely don't think of salvaging as empty trick or useless endeavor but saying it is primary way earning isk is silly.

Same as pirate and other high end ships primary way of them earning isk is shooting stuff,it is rather simple if you bonuses are 90% dmg oriented it is usually good idea to shoot stuff.

Now that is not to say you can't fit salvagers on non bonuses hull to salvage you can and it is great you do but if price for that is staying more than twice amount you need to complete mission...well it might not be primary way of making isk isn't it.

No need to compare performance to any other ship you your self can be on even grounds in Isk/h if you know what are you doing,and let's not forget while another agent might not hit you with same mission it sure as he'll won't hit you with another blockade.

More to the point if it so important part of marauders I am sure CCP will not shaft tractor range and add salvage boost..right.

It is so un fair that CCP nerfed dose ships for so long because they could fit salvagers in that high slots and not massive rr/neut/bombs.

Also in the realm of "other things than missions"....I know eve haz those too...ppl are using marauders to roll billions without fitting single salvager!!!! Crazy!!
Il notify them that they are doing it wrong and send them back to l4 running Aldo after patch when these ships turning into glorified diapers maybe they will have to.

One last thing whole this thread is they being to similar to pirate ships almost same...tracking boost there instead of tank boost here etc...so your marauders are not same as pirate ships will have to wait after rubicon hits..soon.



Like I've mentioned before.

When salvaging lvl 4 missions, I can earn as much, if not more, from loot and salvage than I can from bounties and mission payout/bonus.
Now, in a noctis, I can do this in 1/4 the time it takes to actually run the mission.
That said, a player with low skills will rely heavily on the salvage/loot a a means of earning.

Also, many low skill corp members follow corp fleets and rely solely on salvage/loot as their PRIMARY means of isk.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#7364 - 2013-11-06 23:05:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
There was a brief discussion on the Test server today about the Bastion bonuses and about hull bonuses and DPS projection with short-range weapons. The Paladin's ridiculous projection (95km optimals with Scorch and two optimal-scripted TCs in Bastion) boils down to that baked-in optimal bonus on the hull.

Maybe we can nerf the Paladin as well then everyone will be unhappy with Marauders... Roll

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Anize Oramara
WarpTooZero
#7365 - 2013-11-06 23:14:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Anize Oramara
Kane Fenris wrote:
Anize Oramara wrote:

People do it all the time. You tell me what to buy form the LP store, I contract them to you for the agreed price, bam lp sold.

What do you get for your LP anyways?

Although on the other hand discussing Mission blitzing/LP farming has zero place in a marauder rebalanced thread. If you lp farm then you are sure as hell not running a marauder. A Pirate BS is far better at it, as it should be.


its about beeing efficient.

if a mission is more worth "blitzed" than not it is too in a marauder.

some missions are best farmed if you shoot and salvage only the valuable bs and blitz the rest.
this is where marauders shine if you shoot all the things and salvage all the thing youd better have an alt with a noctis .

so theres why it concerns marauders.

ps.: what i get depends what its offerd, what sells best and what has the best lp to isk ratio.... so no simple answer here

if somebody has an awnser to tractorunit pullable? that would be great


So what you are saying is that LP income is variable too? Just like salvage and loot?

Interesting.

Also on many missions in my DATA salvage/loot accounts for well over half my income for that mission. You will also note that in my data I did not bother salvaging the one mission (and will only blitz drone missions from now on eww) so yeas there is merit to that but so many missions have so much isk in the form of salvage and loot and the best part is I skip the whole traveling bit that is part of blitzing missions. Basically say you have an hour right. Travel time is say 5 min per mission. If you can do 4 missions in that hour and I only do 2 you wasted 20min on travel and I only spent 10min on travel. I spent more time making money you spent more time traveling around not making money.

At least thats my theory.

A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.2.3
Mina Sebiestar
Minmatar Inner Space Conglomerate
#7366 - 2013-11-06 23:38:37 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
There was a brief discussion on the Test server today about the Bastion bonuses and about hull bonuses and DPS projection with short-range weapons. The Paladin's ridiculous projection (95km optimals with Scorch and two optimal-scripted TCs in Bastion) boils down to that baked-in optimal bonus on the hull.

Maybe we can nerf the Paladin as well then everyone will be unhappy with Marauders... Roll



Ha ha like

You choke behind a smile a fake behind the fear

Because >>I is too hard
Kane Fenris
NWP
#7367 - 2013-11-06 23:42:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Kane Fenris
Anize Oramara wrote:

So what you are saying is that LP income is variable too? Just like salvage and loot?

Interesting.

Also on many missions in my DATA salvage/loot accounts for well over half my income for that mission. You will also note that in my data I did not bother salvaging the one mission (and will only blitz drone missions from now on eww) so yeas there is merit to that but so many missions have so much isk in the form of salvage and loot and the best part is I skip the whole traveling bit that is part of blitzing missions. Basically say you have an hour right. Travel time is say 5 min per mission. If you can do 4 missions in that hour and I only do 2 you wasted 20min on travel and I only spent 10min on travel. I spent more time making money you spent more time traveling around not making money.

At least thats my theory.


id rather end that discussion cause its off topic but you leave me no choice here...

you did understand that i uses the " " with purpose on "blitz"

if i run a mission where i get bs spawns but the gate is unlocked and i kill salvage and loot the bs but leave the frigs (unless i have time to shoot them cause im not finished looting and salvageing the bs) which yields a better lp/h while takeing the greatest part of bounties loot and salvage will get better isk/h than shooting and salvageing all the stuff in a marauder?
(or shooting all and returning to salvage all on the same account)

and leaving small stuff may even make up for travel time if you have 2 accounts because the isk/h is inhomogeneous distributed over ships.
a minute spend killing frigs yields less then a minute send killing bs. (thats true for bounties loot and salvage!)
minimizing mission time increases value of lp for the mission (if you earn 8000lp in 30 min the lp reward is better than if you spend 45 doing so)

i cant make it clearer than that if you dont understand you cant just fly every mission the same and ignore lp in general i cant help any further
chaosgrimm
Synth Tech
#7368 - 2013-11-07 02:05:37 UTC  |  Edited by: chaosgrimm
quick summary, my general process goes something like: EFT crunch -> live testing -> re-examine via ETF
hmskrecik wrote:

...
what prevents you from sharing your [live] test results?

added the word "live" for context

The main reason is that it is harder to prove:
* I cant ensure the environments are similar between servers (warp speed changes, spawn locations, warpin locationd, etc)
* The tests require different roles, I cant prove that my performance was equally up to par in both roles. ppl will believe what they want to believe. ppl who support bastion staying the same can say I just didnt use bastion correctly, or challenge me with a faster clear time that never actually occurred.
* I cant run enough tests to get a decent average to mitigate variable influence
* On the other hand, I can very easily prove that like: ~4KM of movement renders bastion projection obsolete.
* The numbers are difficult properly display their significance properly.
If I say: "Ship A needs a 10% [fill in the blank] increase" the thread goes crazy because the number is concrete.
If CCP says "Ship A needs a 10% [fill in the blank] decrease" the thread goes crazy b/c the number is concrete.
If I say: "Ship A completion: 10 mins, ship B completion: 9 mins" no one cares
If I say: "Ship A completion: 20 mins, ship B completion: 18 mins" no one cares
For all anyone knows it could be variables I cant control.
In all of these circumstances (save a few select stats), the difference is 10%.


hmskrecik wrote:

So getting to the point, the easiest way of changing my mind and attitude regarding new balance of marauders is to demonstrate what is performance difference between them. Mind you I don't require court-grade unbeatable, unrepealable evidence. Anecdotal report will do. Actually you can even make up the numbers, if you so desire (let's keep 'em within common sense, m'kay?), and you will win this discussion. Honest.


As indicated above, I wont do that. With the randomness and uncontrolled variables of this game it is very difficult to prove X difference in completion time was directly attributed to factor Y, esp when there are not solid averages to draw from. We are probablyRoll (before additional warp ~time on gates, including the use of bastion vs non bastion, not factoring heavy ewar missions) within 5% - 15% differences in missions completion times ( 3 - 9 mins every hour).

Things I can prove:
* Mobile > Bastion's projection
* Dual prop > single MJD + 3rd TC
* Bastion needed for dual prop
* The rebalance is occuring b/c of power creep
* Marauders were promised the ability to project dmg better than pirates
* At various AC ranges, benefits of damage at range via bastion < Machariel's turret DPS lead (not to mention the further you get out the less tracking matters) (on realistic loadouts mach can lead til around 50KM, and Vargur gains ~13dps over the mach by around 70KM.. This is before taking the mach's drone advantage into account)
* marauders fall victim to power creep due to looting structures in pve
Anize Oramara
WarpTooZero
#7369 - 2013-11-07 07:47:33 UTC
chaosgrimm wrote:
quick summary, my general process goes something like: EFT crunch -> live testing -> re-examine via ETF
hmskrecik wrote:

...
what prevents you from sharing your [live] test results?

added the word "live" for context

The main reason is that it is harder to prove:
* I cant ensure the environments are similar between servers (warp speed changes, spawn locations, warpin locationd, etc)
* The tests require different roles, I cant prove that my performance was equally up to par in both roles. ppl will believe what they want to believe. ppl who support bastion staying the same can say I just didnt use bastion correctly, or challenge me with a faster clear time that never actually occurred.
* I cant run enough tests to get a decent average to mitigate variable influence
* On the other hand, I can very easily prove that like: ~4KM of movement renders bastion projection obsolete.
* The numbers are difficult properly display their significance properly.
If I say: "Ship A needs a 10% [fill in the blank] increase" the thread goes crazy because the number is concrete.
If CCP says "Ship A needs a 10% [fill in the blank] decrease" the thread goes crazy b/c the number is concrete.
If I say: "Ship A completion: 10 mins, ship B completion: 9 mins" no one cares
If I say: "Ship A completion: 20 mins, ship B completion: 18 mins" no one cares
For all anyone knows it could be variables I cant control.
In all of these circumstances (save a few select stats), the difference is 10%.


hmskrecik wrote:

So getting to the point, the easiest way of changing my mind and attitude regarding new balance of marauders is to demonstrate what is performance difference between them. Mind you I don't require court-grade unbeatable, unrepealable evidence. Anecdotal report will do. Actually you can even make up the numbers, if you so desire (let's keep 'em within common sense, m'kay?), and you will win this discussion. Honest.


As indicated above, I wont do that. With the randomness and uncontrolled variables of this game it is very difficult to prove X difference in completion time was directly attributed to factor Y, esp when there are not solid averages to draw from. We are probablyRoll (before additional warp ~time on gates, including the use of bastion vs non bastion, not factoring heavy ewar missions) within 5% - 15% differences in missions completion times ( 3 - 9 mins every hour).

Things I can prove:
* Mobile > Bastion's projection
* Dual prop > single MJD + 3rd TC
* Bastion needed for dual prop
* The rebalance is occuring b/c of power creep
* Marauders were promised the ability to project dmg better than pirates
* At various AC ranges, benefits of damage at range via bastion < Machariel's turret DPS lead (not to mention the further you get out the less tracking matters) (on realistic loadouts mach can lead til around 50KM, and Vargur gains ~13dps over the mach by around 70KM.. This is before taking the mach's drone advantage into account)
* marauders fall victim to power creep due to looting structures in pve

Ok so the biggest difference between TQ and rubicon Vargur is speed. I've seen 100m/s thrown out as the difference while running a MWD. The other number I saw was 4km before the TQ vargur catches up with damage projection? Now what I don't know is based on what falloff that is? Is that with JUST a single extra TC? is it with 2 or three TCs? Is it with two ambits or one? or just a t1 ambit? How many TEs? What Falloff is that 4km based on exactly?

Regardless according to those numbers it's 40 seconds (100m/s difference to make up 4km) before the damage equalises between the two. That's 40km give or take at mwd speeds right?

Doesn't seem as world changing as people make it out is all I'm saying.

A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.2.3
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#7370 - 2013-11-07 09:55:01 UTC
Anize Oramara wrote:
chaosgrimm wrote:
quick summary, my general process goes something like: EFT crunch -> live testing -> re-examine via ETF
hmskrecik wrote:

...
what prevents you from sharing your [live] test results?

added the word "live" for context

The main reason is that it is harder to prove:
* I cant ensure the environments are similar between servers (warp speed changes, spawn locations, warpin locationd, etc)
* The tests require different roles, I cant prove that my performance was equally up to par in both roles. ppl will believe what they want to believe. ppl who support bastion staying the same can say I just didnt use bastion correctly, or challenge me with a faster clear time that never actually occurred.
* I cant run enough tests to get a decent average to mitigate variable influence
* On the other hand, I can very easily prove that like: ~4KM of movement renders bastion projection obsolete.
* The numbers are difficult properly display their significance properly.
If I say: "Ship A needs a 10% [fill in the blank] increase" the thread goes crazy because the number is concrete.
If CCP says "Ship A needs a 10% [fill in the blank] decrease" the thread goes crazy b/c the number is concrete.
If I say: "Ship A completion: 10 mins, ship B completion: 9 mins" no one cares
If I say: "Ship A completion: 20 mins, ship B completion: 18 mins" no one cares
For all anyone knows it could be variables I cant control.
In all of these circumstances (save a few select stats), the difference is 10%.


hmskrecik wrote:

So getting to the point, the easiest way of changing my mind and attitude regarding new balance of marauders is to demonstrate what is performance difference between them. Mind you I don't require court-grade unbeatable, unrepealable evidence. Anecdotal report will do. Actually you can even make up the numbers, if you so desire (let's keep 'em within common sense, m'kay?), and you will win this discussion. Honest.


As indicated above, I wont do that. With the randomness and uncontrolled variables of this game it is very difficult to prove X difference in completion time was directly attributed to factor Y, esp when there are not solid averages to draw from. We are probablyRoll (before additional warp ~time on gates, including the use of bastion vs non bastion, not factoring heavy ewar missions) within 5% - 15% differences in missions completion times ( 3 - 9 mins every hour).

Things I can prove:
* Mobile > Bastion's projection
* Dual prop > single MJD + 3rd TC
* Bastion needed for dual prop
* The rebalance is occuring b/c of power creep
* Marauders were promised the ability to project dmg better than pirates
* At various AC ranges, benefits of damage at range via bastion < Machariel's turret DPS lead (not to mention the further you get out the less tracking matters) (on realistic loadouts mach can lead til around 50KM, and Vargur gains ~13dps over the mach by around 70KM.. This is before taking the mach's drone advantage into account)
* marauders fall victim to power creep due to looting structures in pve

Ok so the biggest difference between TQ and rubicon Vargur is speed. I've seen 100m/s thrown out as the difference while running a MWD. The other number I saw was 4km before the TQ vargur catches up with damage projection? Now what I don't know is based on what falloff that is? Is that with JUST a single extra TC? is it with 2 or three TCs? Is it with two ambits or one? or just a t1 ambit? How many TEs? What Falloff is that 4km based on exactly?

Regardless according to those numbers it's 40 seconds (100m/s difference to make up 4km) before the damage equalises between the two. That's 40km give or take at mwd speeds right?

Doesn't seem as world changing as people make it out is all I'm saying.


If its nto that world changign why not KEEP its speed? So that the vargur is not the NERFED ship?


Its a simple matter.. anyone keeping a vargur after this NERF patch is DUMB or cannot fly a Paladin.

If bastion gave 2 times the falloff bonus (as ALL range bonus do, because we arelady prooved in the past iwth MATH the equivalence between range and 2x falloff bonuses). THEN vargur might be still usable.

But so much whining (unfairly mostly) over minmatar last year made CCP over nerf minmatar as much as they could.


Being mobile with AC is far superior to get a massive boost in tank... over a tank that can already shrug the hardest L4 dps.. and a pathetic minimal increase in falloff.


For god's sake CCP, give us correct falloff bonus on bastion, OR give it back 15ms of speed... andyou can even remove the bastion from the vargur, will not make a difference.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Anize Oramara
WarpTooZero
#7371 - 2013-11-07 10:26:51 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:


If its nto that world changign why not KEEP its speed? So that the vargur is not the NERFED ship?


Can't the same be said for all minor nerfs? If you don't nerf, even a little when giving huge boosts to PG/CPU/Tank/ and little boost to range/EHP/Agility/Mass then you know what you get?

Powercreep.

I figure for all the boosts we got a minor speed nerf is a pretty good trade off.

A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.2.3
chaosgrimm
Synth Tech
#7372 - 2013-11-07 11:03:44 UTC
Anize Oramara wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:


If its nto that world changign why not KEEP its speed? So that the vargur is not the NERFED ship?


Can't the same be said for all minor nerfs? If you don't nerf, even a little when giving huge boosts to PG/CPU/Tank/ and little boost to range/EHP/Agility/Mass then you know what you get?

Powercreep.

I figure for all the boosts we got a minor speed nerf is a pretty good trade off.


I should reiterate for clarity. It difference wasn't simply speed, it was the difference between typical tq, and a bastion sisi fit. This wasn't a comparison between sisi running the same strategy as tq, I don't have numbers for that, but if those numbers are correct, bastion should be avoided on the vargur when possible.

I can prove that the vargur did not get the projection it was promised, and the projection it received is pointless. According to the goals listed in the rebalance, the vargur is supposed to be able to project dmg better than the mach, which hasn't occurred. Instead, the offense gap has been widened. A major point of the rebalance was to make the ship more appealing. Less dps, less mobility, poor RR compatibility, the same terrible sensor strength, and various bastion penalties does not accomplish this.
Anize Oramara
WarpTooZero
#7373 - 2013-11-07 11:35:50 UTC
chaosgrimm wrote:
Anize Oramara wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:


If its nto that world changign why not KEEP its speed? So that the vargur is not the NERFED ship?


Can't the same be said for all minor nerfs? If you don't nerf, even a little when giving huge boosts to PG/CPU/Tank/ and little boost to range/EHP/Agility/Mass then you know what you get?

Powercreep.

I figure for all the boosts we got a minor speed nerf is a pretty good trade off.


I should reiterate for clarity. It difference wasn't simply speed, it was the difference between typical tq, and a bastion sisi fit. This wasn't a comparison between sisi running the same strategy as tq, I don't have numbers for that, but if those numbers are correct, bastion should be avoided on the vargur when possible.

I can prove that the vargur did not get the projection it was promised, and the projection it received is pointless. According to the goals listed in the rebalance, the vargur is supposed to be able to project dmg better than the mach, which hasn't occurred. Instead, the offense gap has been widened. A major point of the rebalance was to make the ship more appealing. Less dps, less mobility, poor RR compatibility, the same terrible sensor strength, and various bastion penalties does not accomplish this.

Actually you are lying about the sensor strength. Base sensor strength on the Vargur on TQ is 85mm and on sisi it's 145mm.

They almost doubled it. Add that to the list of huge boosts the hull got. And it does make a HUGE difference in killing frigs before they can get in range and if you so wish makes any sebos you fit all the more effective.

A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.2.3
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#7374 - 2013-11-07 12:23:23 UTC
Anize Oramara wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:


If its nto that world changign why not KEEP its speed? So that the vargur is not the NERFED ship?


Can't the same be said for all minor nerfs? If you don't nerf, even a little when giving huge boosts to PG/CPU/Tank/ and little boost to range/EHP/Agility/Mass then you know what you get?

Powercreep.

I figure for all the boosts we got a minor speed nerf is a pretty good trade off.



I dont think you get it.. Vargur got zero buffs. BAStion is NEGATIVE on it . The MJD thing is cool, but is INFERIOR to old vargur speedy movment when you run L4 to make real isk real fast.


I repeat.. vargur got ZERO buffs!! Using bastion mode is detrimental to anyoen that knew how to use the ship.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#7375 - 2013-11-07 12:24:29 UTC
Anize Oramara wrote:
chaosgrimm wrote:
Anize Oramara wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:


If its nto that world changign why not KEEP its speed? So that the vargur is not the NERFED ship?


Can't the same be said for all minor nerfs? If you don't nerf, even a little when giving huge boosts to PG/CPU/Tank/ and little boost to range/EHP/Agility/Mass then you know what you get?

Powercreep.

I figure for all the boosts we got a minor speed nerf is a pretty good trade off.


I should reiterate for clarity. It difference wasn't simply speed, it was the difference between typical tq, and a bastion sisi fit. This wasn't a comparison between sisi running the same strategy as tq, I don't have numbers for that, but if those numbers are correct, bastion should be avoided on the vargur when possible.

I can prove that the vargur did not get the projection it was promised, and the projection it received is pointless. According to the goals listed in the rebalance, the vargur is supposed to be able to project dmg better than the mach, which hasn't occurred. Instead, the offense gap has been widened. A major point of the rebalance was to make the ship more appealing. Less dps, less mobility, poor RR compatibility, the same terrible sensor strength, and various bastion penalties does not accomplish this.

Actually you are lying about the sensor strength. Base sensor strength on the Vargur on TQ is 85mm and on sisi it's 145mm.

They almost doubled it. Add that to the list of huge boosts the hull got. And it does make a HUGE difference in killing frigs before they can get in range and if you so wish makes any sebos you fit all the more effective.



This is can resolution.. nto sensor strenght. Really if you do not know that.. how can we take your posts as serious?

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Anize Oramara
WarpTooZero
#7376 - 2013-11-07 12:35:52 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Anize Oramara wrote:
chaosgrimm wrote:
Anize Oramara wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:


If its nto that world changign why not KEEP its speed? So that the vargur is not the NERFED ship?


Can't the same be said for all minor nerfs? If you don't nerf, even a little when giving huge boosts to PG/CPU/Tank/ and little boost to range/EHP/Agility/Mass then you know what you get?

Powercreep.

I figure for all the boosts we got a minor speed nerf is a pretty good trade off.


I should reiterate for clarity. It difference wasn't simply speed, it was the difference between typical tq, and a bastion sisi fit. This wasn't a comparison between sisi running the same strategy as tq, I don't have numbers for that, but if those numbers are correct, bastion should be avoided on the vargur when possible.

I can prove that the vargur did not get the projection it was promised, and the projection it received is pointless. According to the goals listed in the rebalance, the vargur is supposed to be able to project dmg better than the mach, which hasn't occurred. Instead, the offense gap has been widened. A major point of the rebalance was to make the ship more appealing. Less dps, less mobility, poor RR compatibility, the same terrible sensor strength, and various bastion penalties does not accomplish this.

Actually you are lying about the sensor strength. Base sensor strength on the Vargur on TQ is 85mm and on sisi it's 145mm.

They almost doubled it. Add that to the list of huge boosts the hull got. And it does make a HUGE difference in killing frigs before they can get in range and if you so wish makes any sebos you fit all the more effective.



This is can resolution.. nto sensor strenght. Really if you do not know that.. how can we take your posts as serious?

So it is, I was thinking about scan res since well, sensor strength means nothing in lv4s with bastion now, my apologies.

A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.2.3
Brib Vogt
Doomheim
#7377 - 2013-11-07 12:47:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Brib Vogt
Anize Oramara wrote:
Actually you are lying about the sensor strength. Base sensor strength on the Vargur on TQ is 85mm and on sisi it's 145mm.

They almost doubled it. Add that to the list of huge boosts the hull got. And it does make a HUGE difference in killing frigs before they can get in range and if you so wish makes any sebos you fit all the more effective.


Yeah you are right with the increase in SCAN RESOLUTION, BUT i can't remember a single mission where i couldn't sniper the frigs with ACs before they reached me. There are indeed some missions where frigs are already in close proximity when you enter the grid, but there your increased scan resolution helps you nothing at all.

I have no idea how to fly my varg after patch. I though i have a fitting after testing 12 missions on sissi with an ac fit, but right now the fittings are so contradictory.

Small tank/bastion -> a lot of application mods, which inside of bastion mode can't be used with full potential.

Every km you move towards npcs brings you more applied damage then any increase in fall-off through bastion.
Anize Oramara
WarpTooZero
#7378 - 2013-11-07 12:53:05 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Anize Oramara wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:


If its nto that world changign why not KEEP its speed? So that the vargur is not the NERFED ship?


Can't the same be said for all minor nerfs? If you don't nerf, even a little when giving huge boosts to PG/CPU/Tank/ and little boost to range/EHP/Agility/Mass then you know what you get?

Powercreep.

I figure for all the boosts we got a minor speed nerf is a pretty good trade off.



I dont think you get it.. Vargur got zero buffs. BAStion is NEGATIVE on it . The MJD thing is cool, but is INFERIOR to old vargur speedy movment when you run L4 to make real isk real fast.


I repeat.. vargur got ZERO buffs!! Using bastion mode is detrimental to anyoen that knew how to use the ship.

Zero buffs you say? Surely you must be mistaken?

Well if you insist
- Reduced mass
- Improved inertia modifier (I think)
- Improved shield capacity
- Improved capacitor capacity
- Improved targeting range
- Improved Scan res
- Improved sig radius
- Extra high slot
- Almost double PG
- Decreased MJD activation time

Now I might be crazy but those seem like buffs to me? Might need a 3rd party to corroborate.

A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.2.3
Julie Thorne
Project Insanity
#7379 - 2013-11-07 13:02:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Julie Thorne
Anize Oramara wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:


If its nto that world changign why not KEEP its speed? So that the vargur is not the NERFED ship?


Can't the same be said for all minor nerfs? If you don't nerf, even a little when giving huge boosts to PG/CPU/Tank/ and little boost to range/EHP/Agility/Mass then you know what you get?

Powercreep.

I figure for all the boosts we got a minor speed nerf is a pretty good trade off.


I agree, that the Vargur is probably not getting worse (or at least that is how I feel at the moment). However

1. The tachyon Paladin gets more gun damage, range, tank and EW immunity. (power creep 1)
2. All ships can use the new tractoring structure, so relative to the marauders every single ship in the game will get boosted. (power creep 2)

Edit:

Anize Oramara wrote:

Well if you insist
- Reduced mass
- Improved inertia modifier (I think)
- Improved shield capacity
- Improved capacitor capacity
- Improved targeting range
- Improved Scan res
- Improved sig radius
- Extra high slot
- Almost double PG
- Decreased MJD activation time


This is all great, but hardly any of these help you get the missions done faster. E.g. decreased MJD activation time is great - I probably have 1 mission where it would make a difference. Almost double PG only helps to fit MWD and MJD, otherwise useless, shield capacity does nothing for me, etc

Also Paladin gets most of these and a lot more that actually matters.

Edit 2:
The only thing that I want from this list is the scan res increase (maybe the reduced mass) - I guess that says something.
Dav Varan
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#7380 - 2013-11-07 13:32:45 UTC
Kane Fenris wrote:
Dav Varan wrote:
Kane Fenris wrote:


theres a whole thread about it:
[Rubicon] Rapid Heavy Missile Launchers

now i hear you saying: "but theres nothing about the Golem !!!!!11111"

right but let me ask you a question:
what would make the golem not op haveing bonuses applied that other bs have?



I don't know what your saying there.

Making RHML bonused would not make the golem op in the same way that bonusing Dual 250mm Rails won't make a kronos op.

It's just a choice you make when doing your fittings.
Better v big stuff or better v fast stuff.

The RHML is to Cruise launchers what the Dual 250 is to 425mm

Its just the weaker launcher thats easier to fit and is better at hitting fast stuff at the expense of dps.
Thats why it needs to have its bonuses otherwise useless.


im saying if you seriously think having bonuses apply other than those who affect the number of effective launchers (missile velocity is debateable though), wont break the game ballance your insane or stupid you may choose which.
if you seriously think thos bonuses should apply plz post in the RHML thread cause it concerns the launcher not the golem....



If not that then the opposite in relation to the hyperthetical you espouse is otherwise the alternative of not the opposite of the unreal value of the inverse statement , isnt it !

Oh and FYI your not the thread police I'll post Golem/Bastion/RHML points here as
1) I want to
2) its the more relevant thread.

If you thing that RHML bonusing is going to make overpower then you are insane, that is if that is what your saying, who the f knows tbh.

RHML is less powerful to start with than either Torp or Cruise.
It needs the same bonusing on the hull to keep it's power in ratio with other BS launchers.
Otherwise its not an option and Sandbox means options.

Kronos flyer would be rightly miffed if 350's and D250's did not get bonused removing choice.