These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page12
 

4 New Marauders Idea
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Amarisen Gream
The.Kin.of.Jupiter
#21 - 2015-10-09 19:31:46 UTC
I have the feeling - That CCP is losing their grasp on the role/task of each ship...

The introduction of D3s, and the new Discovery Frigate.
D3s made AFs pretty damn near vanish.
The new mining frigates have near the yield/cargo of a proc/skiff...

I feel that CCP might need to step back and remember what the ship roles/task are in EVE. Then review all the T1 ships on that plan. Then fill in the T2/T3s into the more niche/special purpose.

"The Lord loosed upon them his fierce anger All of his fury and rage. He dispatched against them a band of Avenging Angels" - The Scriptures, Book II, Apocalypse 10:1

#NPCLivesMatter #Freetheboobs
Thron Legacy
White Zulu
Scorpion Federation
#22 - 2015-10-09 20:27:29 UTC
7.5% sentry tracking per level? Really?

Biomass yourself
unidenify
Deaf Armada
#23 - 2015-10-09 21:41:58 UTC
I feel 70% resist toward EWAR is bad

and while I support Drone Marauder, I feel that it need to have some drone damage application bonus tied to Bastion
Yong Shin
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#24 - 2015-10-09 21:44:10 UTC
Thron Legacy wrote:
7.5% sentry tracking per level? Really?

Biomass yourself


Thank you for your thoughtful contribution to this post. I do hope you are aware that the T1 Dominix already has this bonus.
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#25 - 2015-10-09 23:41:47 UTC
unidenify wrote:
I feel 70% resist toward EWAR is bad

and while I support Drone Marauder, I feel that it need to have some drone damage application bonus tied to Bastion


Yea, I'm starting to think so to. Was just to find the best feature of bastion, downgrade it a little and make it into a Role bonus. But instead of that feature, something more definitive would be better, like:

Target Disruption, Target Painting, Sensor Dampening, and ECM Immunity.


Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#26 - 2015-10-09 23:44:15 UTC
Yong Shin wrote:
Thron Legacy wrote:
7.5% sentry tracking per level? Really?

Biomass yourself


Thank you for your thoughtful contribution to this post. I do hope you are aware that the T1 Dominix already has this bonus.


Doesn't seem like he's capable of reading in game text.
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#27 - 2015-10-10 04:03:31 UTC
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
either they are marauders or they are not, no pseudo marauders.

and besides that, we dont need another marauder except perhaps a drone boat.


You don't hear the T2 Rokh chants?? Or the T2 Abaddon moanings??
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#28 - 2015-10-10 04:17:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Daniela Doran
Lloyd Roses wrote:
Just from a glance, the amarr, caldari and especially gallente ones are utterly bonkers. The minmatar one looks shite in comparison.

I really se no reason to push the boundaries regarding both application and raw damage towards those proposed numbers, like the amarr one would be running more or less 15-16 effective launchers, potentially above T1 resists, resist bonus etc.etc.etc... while the gallente one stacks up +15% sentry tracking per level.

If you want to raise attention for a secondary class of marauders, rather come up with a well worded and sane concept and leave the numbers to actual GDs that got a less biased perspective. If your concept is good, it might gain traction eventually, just like nullified ceptors were asked for by the community.

Ed: Is ~15 launchers for amarr and apparently just 7.5% for heavies and sentries each. Still dafuq.



I really like to know how you got that "gallente one stacks up +15% sentry tracking per level" figure from.

I'm not a number cruncher like Baboli so if the actually numbers I posted are off balance, I was hoping that players like you or Baboli would make the necessary readjustments, like maybe reducing the turrets down to 5 ect........ The figures I put together in this post for new Marauders wasn't intended to be final. I was rather hoping to spark an idea that can lead to better and further balanced ideas from the community.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#29 - 2015-10-10 09:58:04 UTC
Existing battleships arent in a great position to begin with, but your suggestion is to further obsolete them by making new battleships that are more powerful in every way. And why do you want to do this? because some battleship models are missing T2 versions?

Its not just the balance thats the problem with this idea, its finding a purpose for these to exist at all. As long as they do the exact same job as other battleships but better in every way this idea wont get much support.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
DrysonBennington
Eagle's Talon's
#30 - 2015-10-10 10:32:19 UTC  |  Edited by: DrysonBennington
Just like with the Navies from WWII that once the aircraft carrier came along the battleship was made obsolete.

Are we seeing the obsoleting of the battleship because it not longer serves any purpose and can be easily taken out by a small group of T3 Strat Cruisers?

If so then what will replace the battleship in High Sec?

Tactical Battlecruisers built around the same design principle as the Tactical Destroyers.

Since we are not allowed to have Carriers in High Sec and CCP wont build Light Carriers for High Sec use then the equation equals that more tactical designs be developed.
Zan Shiro
Doomheim
#31 - 2015-10-10 14:13:18 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
What kind of comedy/gimmick fit can we do with a double optimal bonus rail battleship?


So many options here really.

that is doing the damage output of kronos for a fun bonus. 6 rails + 3 (50% damage max level) is 9 turrets. 25% per BS + 100% role is well....9 rails effective to kronos. Think they missed the part caldari rail snipers are not damage monsters. Its the tradeoff for longer range fighting. Kronos only gets the snipe in bastion...fair caveat.


I'd like to see a t2 rokh I won't lie....but not this way.
Neil Anderson
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#32 - 2015-10-10 14:59:03 UTC
Daniela Doran wrote:
Hello Peeps, I've gotten one of those ideas that's been bugging me constantly and won't go away. And when that happens it means it's time to put it on the forums so you forum warmongers can hack it to pieces. I'm not sure if it's a good idea or bad, but I do believe it's good enough to give CCP something to ponder about in the furture. My idea consists of a new breed of non-bastion Marauders that fills the void left open for each races, along with some T1 BS hulls that's been left rather secluded. These are just base ideas and not final so I'd appreciate IMPROVED feedback if possible.
...
Target Disruption, Target Painting, Sensor Dampening, and ECM Immunity.



Ok. A couple of questions from me here, and the answers to both of them are likely linked.

1. Can these marauders fit the bastion module like the current four are able to?

I'm not seeing any "Can fit bastion module" bonus anywhere. It would be easier to balance these ships relative to the other marauders if they did use bastion.

2. Why are you giving these ships immensely powerful E-War resistance/Immunity bonuses?

The four marauders we do have have to activate the bastion module in order to become e-war immune -- with massive benefits/drawbacks to go with it -- while the ships that you propose do not get any drawbacks, only benefits. If you proposed different weaknesses for these marauders e.g. poor targeting systems (low scan res, targeting range and low number of targets locked) due to more power being given to anti-e-war systems than base ship capabilities -- or something similar -- you might get more support for your idea.

I would actually like to see more marauders added to the game, incorporating the secondary weapon systems of each race, but they would need to be balanced and not make every other battleship obsolete.
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#33 - 2015-10-11 00:38:14 UTC
Neil Anderson wrote:
Daniela Doran wrote:
Hello Peeps, I've gotten one of those ideas that's been bugging me constantly and won't go away. And when that happens it means it's time to put it on the forums so you forum warmongers can hack it to pieces. I'm not sure if it's a good idea or bad, but I do believe it's good enough to give CCP something to ponder about in the furture. My idea consists of a new breed of non-bastion Marauders that fills the void left open for each races, along with some T1 BS hulls that's been left rather secluded. These are just base ideas and not final so I'd appreciate IMPROVED feedback if possible.
...
Target Disruption, Target Painting, Sensor Dampening, and ECM Immunity.



Ok. A couple of questions from me here, and the answers to both of them are likely linked.

1. Can these marauders fit the bastion module like the current four are able to?

I'm not seeing any "Can fit bastion module" bonus anywhere. It would be easier to balance these ships relative to the other marauders if they did use bastion.

2. Why are you giving these ships immensely powerful E-War resistance/Immunity bonuses?

The four marauders we do have have to activate the bastion module in order to become e-war immune -- with massive benefits/drawbacks to go with it -- while the ships that you propose do not get any drawbacks, only benefits. If you proposed different weaknesses for these marauders e.g. poor targeting systems (low scan res, targeting range and low number of targets locked) due to more power being given to anti-e-war systems than base ship capabilities -- or something similar -- you might get more support for your idea.

I would actually like to see more marauders added to the game, incorporating the secondary weapon systems of each race, but they would need to be balanced and not make every other battleship obsolete.



Original it was thought of as a non-Bastion T2 Marauder, but it looks like that idea isn't accepted.

The Ewar resistance role bonus was a a toned down version of the greatest attribute from bastion (the ships can still be tackled and neuted)

I was hoping to spark some thought process into developing additional T2 Marauders with each races secondary weapon systems, there's still plenty room for improvement. These Marauder additions was something I'd like CCP to add down the road, but not right now.
Sahulea
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#34 - 2015-10-11 23:40:31 UTC
Daniela Doran wrote:
Hello Peeps, I've gotten one of those ideas that's been bugging me constantly and won't go away. And when that happens it means it's time to put it on the forums so you forum warmongers can hack it to pieces. I'm not sure if it's a good idea or bad, but I do believe it's good enough to give CCP something to ponder about in the furture. My idea consists of a new breed of non-bastion Marauders that fills the void left open for each races, along with some T1 BS hulls that's been left rather secluded. These are just base ideas and not final so I'd appreciate IMPROVED feedback if possible.

Amarr

Abaddon hull 8H,4M,8L;0 turrets, 6 launchers
Amarr Battleship bonuses
10% bonus to Cruise Missile and Torpedo Missile damage
4% bonus to all armor resistances
Marauder bonuses (per skill level):
10% bonus to Cruise and Torpedo missile max velocity
7.5% bonus to Rapid Heavy Missile, Cruise, and Torpedo Missile Launcher rate of fire
Role Bonus:
70% reduction in Micro Jump Drive reactivation delay
Target Disruption, Target Painting, Sensor Dampening, and ECM Immunity.




Caldari

Rokh hull 8H,8M,4L;6 turrets, 0 launchers
Caldari Battleship bonuses (per skill level):
10% bonus to Large Hybrid Turret optimal range
4% bonus to all shield resistances
Marauder bonuses (per skill level)
10% bonus to Large Hybrid Turret damage
10% bonus to Large Hybrid Turret optimal range
Role Bonus:
70% reduction in Micro Jump Drive reactivation delay
Target Disruption, Target Painting, Sensor Dampening, and ECM Immunity.




Gallente

Dominix hull 8H,5M,7L;4 turrets, 0 launchers
Gallente Battleship bonuses (per skill level):
7.5% bonus to Heavy Drone max velocity and tracking speed
12.5% bonus to Drone hitpoints and damage
Marauder bonuses (per skill level):
7.5% bonus to Armor Repairer amount
7.5% bonus to Sentry Drone optimal range and tracking
Role Bonus:
70% reduction in Micro Jump Drive reactivation delay
Target Disruption, Target Painting, Sensor Dampening, and ECM Immunity.



Minmatar
Typhoon hull 8H,7M,5L;0 turrets, 6 launchers
Minmatar Battleship bonuses (per skill level):
7.5% bonus to Rapid Heavy Missile, Cruise Missile and Torpedo Launcher rate of fire
7.5% bonus to Cruise Missile and Torpedo explosion velocity
Marauders bonuses (per skill level):
7.5% bonus to Shield Booster amount
10% bonus to Cruise and Torpedo missile max velocity
Role Bonus:
70% reduction in Micro Jump Drive reactivation delay
Target Disruption, Target Painting, Sensor Dampening, and ECM Immunity.



Maybe Tech III Battleships better idea
DrysonBennington
Eagle's Talon's
#35 - 2015-10-12 00:44:33 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
What kind of comedy/gimmick fit can we do with a double optimal bonus rail battleship?


What kind of comedy/gimmick can be used to get you pay to play internet spaceships?
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#36 - 2015-10-15 08:38:40 UTC
Okay I've revised and re-edited the stats on these new Marauders that includes the bastion feature. Would like to see some new feedback on these revised editions.
Previous page12