These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page
 

Sp CCP, how is that Marauder as a PvP ship concept working out?

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#1 - 2014-01-03 14:46:56 UTC
I have not seen or heard of many fleet doctrines including Marauders.
So CCP , can you show me some km's of players using Marauders as a PvP weapon?
And no, 12 Catalysts killing a Vargur does not count.

Looks to me that Yitterbum/Fozzie/Rise's vision for the Marauder, is, as predicted, an utter failure.
Batelle
Federal Navy Academy
#2 - 2014-01-03 14:47:27 UTC
who cares?

"**CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"**

Never forget.
Mizhir
Devara Biotech
#3 - 2014-01-03 14:51:37 UTC
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=300241&find=unread

There you go. Plenty of Marauder action.

β€οΈοΈπŸ’›πŸ’šπŸ’™πŸ’œ
Electrique Wizard
Mutually Lucrative Business Proposals
#4 - 2014-01-03 14:52:13 UTC
They're expensive and they dont work with Logi in bastion mode.
Solo PVP is kinda iffy in a "sieged" battleship worth a few bil if done right.

I am the Zodiac, I am the stars, You are the sorceress, my priestess of Mars, Queen of the night, swathed in satin black, Your ivory flesh upon my torture rack.
stoicfaux
#5 - 2014-01-03 14:53:19 UTC
Batelle wrote:
who cares?

This guy cares: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=309542&find=unread

Granted, he inadvertently undocked in a PvE fit, made some tactical errors and what-not, but the inability of the Torpedo Golem to do any kind of meaningful damage to a double painted Tornado was frustrating.

OTOH, maybe that's not the greatest example.

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#6 - 2014-01-03 14:53:35 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
I have not seen or heard of many fleet doctrines including Marauders.
So CCP , can you show me some km's of players using Marauders as a PvP weapon?
And no, 12 Catalysts killing a Vargur does not count.

Looks to me that Yitterbum/Fozzie/Rise's vision for the Marauder, is, as predicted, an utter failure.


Then why do I see you undocking from the Lanngisi's Sister station every single night in a Paladin if there is something wrong with the ship? Everyone I know who uses maruaders for missions is highly impressed , to the point of getting rid of their loot pinata pirate BS and using less gank worthy tech2 fit Marauders instead.

Simply put, CCPs changes to marauders have been a resounding PVE success, why are you slamming them for making the ship I see you use every night better at it's job (regardless of CCP stated reasons for the changes)? Or is it just that you need something to complain about every day?
Tebizla
#7 - 2014-01-03 14:59:23 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
I have not seen or heard of many fleet doctrines including Marauders.
So CCP , can you show me some km's of players using Marauders as a PvP weapon?
And no, 12 Catalysts killing a Vargur does not count.

Looks to me that Yitterbum/Fozzie/Rise's vision for the Marauder, is, as predicted, an utter failure.


Then why do I see you undocking from the Lanngisi's Sister station every single night in a Paladin if there is something wrong with the ship? Everyone I know who uses maruaders for missions is highly impressed , to the point of getting rid of their loot pinata pirate BS and using less gank worthy tech2 fit Marauders instead.

Simply put, CCPs changes to marauders have been a resounding PVE success, why are you slamming them for making the ship I see you use every night better at it's job (regardless of CCP stated reasons for the changes)? Or is it just that you need something to complain about every day?


He was not complaining in regards to their PvE success.

Obviously not a forum / spy / market alt ...
Tebizla
#8 - 2014-01-03 15:00:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Tebizla
double post

Obviously not a forum / spy / market alt ...
Tebizla
#9 - 2014-01-03 15:01:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Tebizla
triple post

Obviously not a forum / spy / market alt ...
Angelica Dreamstar
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#10 - 2014-01-03 15:03:56 UTC
Awwww the hater made his own thread to put his inferiority up for display... such a cute little fella! : D <3

bingo, his pig not being a goat doesn't make the pig wrong, just him an idiot for shouting at his pig "WHY ARENT YOU A GOAT!" (Source)

-- Ralph King-Griffin, about deranged people playing EVE ONLINE
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#11 - 2014-01-03 15:04:42 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
I have not seen or heard of many fleet doctrines including Marauders.
So CCP , can you show me some km's of players using Marauders as a PvP weapon?
And no, 12 Catalysts killing a Vargur does not count.

Looks to me that Yitterbum/Fozzie/Rise's vision for the Marauder, is, as predicted, an utter failure.


Then why do I see you undocking from the Lanngisi's Sister station every single night in a Paladin if there is something wrong with the ship? Everyone I know who uses maruaders for missions is highly impressed , to the point of getting rid of their loot pinata pirate BS and using less gank worthy tech2 fit Marauders instead.

Simply put, CCPs changes to marauders have been a resounding PVE success, why are you slamming them for making the ship I see you use every night better at it's job (regardless of CCP stated reasons for the changes)? Or is it just that you need something to complain about every day?



Gee, guess you have some difficulty reading.
Note the word's PvP.
Note the CSM minutes where Yitterbum makes it oh so clear the changes were to make it a PvP ship.
Note that the ship is useless in Incursions now, which was it's biggest PvE use.

As for me flying in one, yeah, because I was doing SoE missions to get some Stratios BPC's, because Armour Incursion income has been trashed since the Kronos and Paladin were wrecked.

I NEVER flew one in missions before it was wrecked for Incursions, and I would be flying a pirate BS in most cases, except for the fact that I don't own one, and given all the asshats around the SoE mission hubs, the additional tank of a Paladin is needed.

And once again, the title of this was PvP, which was CCP's stated vision, if you would care to read the CSM minutes.
Batelle
Federal Navy Academy
#12 - 2014-01-03 15:07:09 UTC
does this count?

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4067282#post4067282

"**CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"**

Never forget.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#13 - 2014-01-03 15:07:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Tebizla wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
I have not seen or heard of many fleet doctrines including Marauders.
So CCP , can you show me some km's of players using Marauders as a PvP weapon?
And no, 12 Catalysts killing a Vargur does not count.

Looks to me that Yitterbum/Fozzie/Rise's vision for the Marauder, is, as predicted, an utter failure.


Then why do I see you undocking from the Lanngisi's Sister station every single night in a Paladin if there is something wrong with the ship? Everyone I know who uses maruaders for missions is highly impressed , to the point of getting rid of their loot pinata pirate BS and using less gank worthy tech2 fit Marauders instead.

Simply put, CCPs changes to marauders have been a resounding PVE success, why are you slamming them for making the ship I see you use every night better at it's job (regardless of CCP stated reasons for the changes)? Or is it just that you need something to complain about every day?


He was not complaining in regards to their PvE success.


You need to know the back story..

You can go to the features and ideas forum and see how he pitched a massive hissy fit when the DEVs he listed basically said than part of the reasoning behind the marauder changes was usefulness in pvp (ie ccp moved away from the idea that Marauders were "PVE focuses ships" and towards having marauders fit in better in the grand scheme of EVE in general).

In other words , Dinsdale was mad than the developers of a pvp focused game would balance a ship class in a pvp focused game around the concept of pvp. He ranted and raved about how this was a 'nerf' to PVE, high sec, incursion runners, the armor incursion community and it was nothing more than yet another null sec cartel conspiracy to screw him over personally.

So yes, even though he doesn't explicitly mention PVE here, he is a PVE pilot and he's mad at CCP for pvping his pve-boat. Problem is , as I explained, that what CCP has done for marauders turned out to be great for PVE pilots, as proved by Dinsdale himself flying one every single night in Lanngisi.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#14 - 2014-01-03 15:07:54 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
I have not seen or heard of many fleet doctrines including Marauders.
So CCP , can you show me some km's of players using Marauders as a PvP weapon?
And no, 12 Catalysts killing a Vargur does not count.

Looks to me that Yitterbum/Fozzie/Rise's vision for the Marauder, is, as predicted, an utter failure.


Look up Skyflyer on EVEkill. Seems he's having a blast with them.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#15 - 2014-01-03 15:09:08 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
I have not seen or heard of many fleet doctrines including Marauders.
So CCP , can you show me some km's of players using Marauders as a PvP weapon?
And no, 12 Catalysts killing a Vargur does not count.

Looks to me that Yitterbum/Fozzie/Rise's vision for the Marauder, is, as predicted, an utter failure.


Then why do I see you undocking from the Lanngisi's Sister station every single night in a Paladin if there is something wrong with the ship? Everyone I know who uses maruaders for missions is highly impressed , to the point of getting rid of their loot pinata pirate BS and using less gank worthy tech2 fit Marauders instead.

Simply put, CCPs changes to marauders have been a resounding PVE success, why are you slamming them for making the ship I see you use every night better at it's job (regardless of CCP stated reasons for the changes)? Or is it just that you need something to complain about every day?



Gee, guess you have some difficulty reading.
Note the word's PvP.
Note the CSM minutes where Yitterbum makes it oh so clear the changes were to make it a PvP ship.
Note that the ship is useless in Incursions now, which was it's biggest PvE use.

As for me flying in one, yeah, because I was doing SoE missions to get some Stratios BPC's, because Armour Incursion income has been trashed since the Kronos and Paladin were wrecked.

I NEVER flew one in missions before it was wrecked for Incursions, and I would be flying a pirate BS in most cases, except for the fact that I don't own one, and given all the asshats around the SoE mission hubs, the additional tank of a Paladin is needed.

And once again, the title of this was PvP, which was CCP's stated vision, if you would care to read the CSM minutes.


Would you care to comment on your initial analysis that Marauders were wrecked for PvE by the changes?

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#16 - 2014-01-03 15:11:34 UTC
You're omitting the prefix " niche".

Murderers of Negotiable Motivations

=]|[=
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#17 - 2014-01-03 15:12:06 UTC
what are you talking about? the old marauders are still in the game. me and my nullsec cartel friends fly them in armour nullsec incursion fleets with our dev buddies every saturday. i fly a web paladin, we rmt all the isk we make

or was that supposed to be secret
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#18 - 2014-01-03 15:12:35 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Tebizla wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
I have not seen or heard of many fleet doctrines including Marauders.
So CCP , can you show me some km's of players using Marauders as a PvP weapon?
And no, 12 Catalysts killing a Vargur does not count.

Looks to me that Yitterbum/Fozzie/Rise's vision for the Marauder, is, as predicted, an utter failure.


Then why do I see you undocking from the Lanngisi's Sister station every single night in a Paladin if there is something wrong with the ship? Everyone I know who uses maruaders for missions is highly impressed , to the point of getting rid of their loot pinata pirate BS and using less gank worthy tech2 fit Marauders instead.

Simply put, CCPs changes to marauders have been a resounding PVE success, why are you slamming them for making the ship I see you use every night better at it's job (regardless of CCP stated reasons for the changes)? Or is it just that you need something to complain about every day?


He was not complaining in regards to their PvE success.


You need to knwo the back story..

You can go to the features and ideas forum and see how he pitched a massive hissy fit when the DEVs he listed basically said than part of the reasoning behind the marauder changes was usefulness in pvp (ie ccp moved away from the idea that Marauders were "PVE focuses ships" and towards having marauders fit in better in the grand scheme of EVE in general).

In other words , Dinsdale was mad than the developers of a pvp focused game would balance a ship class in a pvp focused game around the concept of pvp. He ranted and raved about how this was a 'nerf' to PVE, high sec, incursion runners, the armor incursion community and it was nothing more than yet another null sec cartel conspiracy to screw him over personally.

So yes, even though he doesn't explicitly mention PVE here, he is a PVE pilot and he's mad at CCP for pvping his pve-boat. Problem is , as I explained, that what CCP has done for marauders turned out to be great for PVE pilots, as proved by Dinsdale himself flying one every single night in Lanngisi.


Guess I will have to pull up stakes now, given the gankers will be sharpening their knives with that knowledge.
I am surprised that given how much vitriol you spew towards me, you have not tried to gank me yourself, or organize a group.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#19 - 2014-01-03 15:13:25 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
I have not seen or heard of many fleet doctrines including Marauders.
So CCP , can you show me some km's of players using Marauders as a PvP weapon?
And no, 12 Catalysts killing a Vargur does not count.

Looks to me that Yitterbum/Fozzie/Rise's vision for the Marauder, is, as predicted, an utter failure.


Then why do I see you undocking from the Lanngisi's Sister station every single night in a Paladin if there is something wrong with the ship? Everyone I know who uses maruaders for missions is highly impressed , to the point of getting rid of their loot pinata pirate BS and using less gank worthy tech2 fit Marauders instead.

Simply put, CCPs changes to marauders have been a resounding PVE success, why are you slamming them for making the ship I see you use every night better at it's job (regardless of CCP stated reasons for the changes)? Or is it just that you need something to complain about every day?



Gee, guess you have some difficulty reading.
Note the word's PvP.
Note the CSM minutes where Yitterbum makes it oh so clear the changes were to make it a PvP ship.
Note that the ship is useless in Incursions now, which was it's biggest PvE use.

As for me flying in one, yeah, because I was doing SoE missions to get some Stratios BPC's, because Armour Incursion income has been trashed since the Kronos and Paladin were wrecked.

I NEVER flew one in missions before it was wrecked for Incursions, and I would be flying a pirate BS in most cases, except for the fact that I don't own one, and given all the asshats around the SoE mission hubs, the additional tank of a Paladin is needed.

And once again, the title of this was PvP, which was CCP's stated vision, if you would care to read the CSM minutes.


I read them.

Thank you for proving my point, the thread is about PVE (Incursions). You are mad that CCP balanced a ship you use with pvp in mind. Well, it's a pvp game.

I fly a machariel. I love it and it's great for PVE. CCP nerfed tracking enhancers which affected the mach more than any other battleship for pve purposes (the Varg and nightmare get tracking bonuses, other ships had web bonuses etc). i didn't complain, i know the nerf was with pvp in mind and i'm playing a pvp game despite being a pve pilot and the mach not being used much in pvp. The mach is gonna get even more nerfs later.

This is the difference between you and me. I know what kind of game I'm playing (a pvp game) and accept that my chosen way of playing (pve) is somewhat counter to that, where as you ignore the very same fact. I think what you do is extremely selfish.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#20 - 2014-01-03 15:17:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:


Guess I will have to pull up stakes now, given the gankers will be sharpening their knives with that knowledge.
I am surprised that given how much vitriol you spew towards me, you have not tried to gank me yourself, or organize a group.


That would require me to give a damn about you, which i do not lol. Not once have i ganked anyone and even if i did, i would not start with you as it would do nothing more than fuel your excessive paranoia.

I'm simply bringing to light your selfishness and hypocrisy on this matter where you are insulting CCP for BUFFING a PVE ship class to a level of actually usefulness, while at the same time demonstrating to the rest of our community that not all PVE focused players are at all like you.
123Next pageLast page