These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

Golem tweak.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Roland Scott
Imperial Security Bureau X
Malicious Mineral Hounds
#1 - 2015-10-10 15:07:14 UTC
Hi

So the Golem has a 10% buff to target painters per marauder skill level. I have always gotten the impression this was a little out of place but it did the job. Now that we have Missile guidance enhancers and computers it would seem more in keeping with the Caldari to have some sort of bonus applying to them instead of the target painters.

Just a thought.
Nyalnara
Marauder Initiative
#2 - 2015-10-10 18:25:28 UTC
Roland Scott wrote:
Hi

So the Golem has a 10% buff to target painters per marauder skill level. I have always gotten the impression this was a little out of place but it did the job. Now that we have Missile guidance enhancers and computers it would seem more in keeping with the Caldari to have some sort of bonus applying to them instead of the target painters.

Just a thought.


No. Because the TP bonus is useful for you AND your potential fleetmates, while the MGC/MGE would only apply to you. (Also, doing that would greatly devalue the Raven Navy which only interest is the way better application.)

French half-noob.

Non, je ne suis pas gentil.
Aivlis Eldelbar
State War Academy
Caldari State
#3 - 2015-10-10 18:42:36 UTC
Nyalnara wrote:

No. Because the TP bonus is useful for you AND your potential fleetmates, while the MGC/MGE would only apply to you. (Also, doing that would greatly devalue the Raven Navy which only interest is the way better application.)


Pretty much this.
Also, in some circumstances a TP is way better than a MGC, you just have to do the math.
Haatakan Reppola
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#4 - 2015-10-10 18:43:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Haatakan Reppola
Nyalnara wrote:

No. Because the TP bonus is useful for you AND your potential fleetmates, while the MGC/MGE would only apply to you. (Also, doing that would greatly devalue the Raven Navy which only interest is the way better application.)


Marauders are not "natural" fleet ships, they are more suited for solo play (mainly PvE but some few do PvP with them)
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#5 - 2015-10-10 19:41:41 UTC
Aivlis Eldelbar wrote:
Nyalnara wrote:

No. Because the TP bonus is useful for you AND your potential fleetmates, while the MGC/MGE would only apply to you. (Also, doing that would greatly devalue the Raven Navy which only interest is the way better application.)


Pretty much this.
Also, in some circumstances a TP is way better than a MGC, you just have to do the math.


well the skill train and price difference should be enough too allow them both too be useful, if the golem got an explosion radius bonus or an explosion velocity bonus. that and navy raven is much more mobile than a golem especially one in bastion mode but more mobility could be added too Navy raven aswell.

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#6 - 2015-10-10 22:28:25 UTC
I think they should just switch it to a range bonus instead of an amount bonus. It's no good if it can't hit out to cruise missile range. I like to hit my enemies from very, very far away.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#7 - 2015-10-10 23:29:49 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
I think they should just switch it to a range bonus instead of an amount bonus. It's no good if it can't hit out to cruise missile range. I like to hit my enemies from very, very far away.


After the upcoming buff to MGCs, they will be close in effectiveness to TPs on a Golem.
Reducing bonus in exchange for a range bonus will only makes MGCs shine more.

Also, they're easier because MGCs don't require target swapping.
I've already been using them on my Golem, before the MGC buff was even a thought, and they're arguably better than TPs.

I don't think the Golem should be given any bonus to TPs, MGCs, or basic bonuses to missiles.

Instead, I'd rather see the drone bay buffed to 100, and the bw buffed to 50.
Now you've got something I can work with.
Chocolaty Sprogmaster
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#8 - 2015-10-10 23:31:35 UTC
It should affect both to different degrees to make them both useful, depending on the situation.
Atomeon
Laistera
#9 - 2015-10-11 00:35:00 UTC
I never understood why Golem has bonus on TPs, this is a minmatar bonus usually.
It seems better to get at MGC bonus.
Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
#10 - 2015-10-11 01:53:26 UTC
Atomeon wrote:
I never understood why Golem has bonus on TPs, this is a minmatar bonus usually.
It seems better to get at MGC bonus.


Well, for one, MGC's are a fairly recent addition to Eve. The Golem's been around for much longer.

Besides, am I really the only one here that questions this idea based on the realization that OP is essentually asking for on bonus to turn into effectively two? Did we all forget that TP's don't buff missile projection? So, CCP would either conveniently forget that themselves as well and we'd walk away with a much stronger buff than intended, or they'd have to nerf it into the ground to the point that it would serve far less in the way of application. As much as I would love to have 2 forms of application buffs and 2 forms of projection buffs on the Golem given I fly the damned thing, I'll pass I think.

Granted, the current MGC/MGE modules suck right now and could use a boost -- CCP is already about to give them a boost in December. A 10% boost isn't a lot, and may not even be enough for at least one of these module families alone and even less for the other, it's a start at least.

"Tomahawks?"

"----in' A, right?"

"Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."

"----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#11 - 2015-10-11 07:59:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Daniela Doran
Atomeon wrote:
I never understood why Golem has bonus on TPs, this is a minmatar bonus usually.
It seems better to get at MGC bonus.


Yep, I agree, or give the TPs a range bonus like Reaver said.
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#12 - 2015-10-11 16:12:21 UTC
Sobaan Tali wrote:
Did we all forget that TP's don't buff missile projection?.

TP have never affect that actual max range of a missile so that aspect of "projection" is off the table.
TP have never affected the ROF of the launchers so that takes that aspect of "projection" off the table.
TP have never affected the max damage that a missile has so that aspect of "projection" is off the table.
So this leaves us with the application of damage and TP have always had a serious affect on that.

Since you seem to thnk you are the only one that sees this perhaps you can clarify it so the rest of us can be in on your little secret.
Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
#13 - 2015-10-11 20:52:13 UTC
Donnachadh wrote:
Sobaan Tali wrote:
Did we all forget that TP's don't buff missile projection?.

TP have never affect that actual max range of a missile so that aspect of "projection" is off the table.
TP have never affected the ROF of the launchers so that takes that aspect of "projection" off the table.
TP have never affected the max damage that a missile has so that aspect of "projection" is off the table.
So this leaves us with the application of damage and TP have always had a serious affect on that.

Since you seem to thnk you are the only one that sees this perhaps you can clarify it so the rest of us can be in on your little secret.


Uh...TP's don't affect missile projection, they affect missile application?

Since when was that a secret? Pretty sure that's common knowledge.

"Tomahawks?"

"----in' A, right?"

"Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."

"----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."
Nyalnara
Marauder Initiative
#14 - 2015-10-11 23:46:04 UTC
Sobaan Tali wrote:
Donnachadh wrote:
Sobaan Tali wrote:
Did we all forget that TP's don't buff missile projection?.

TP have never affect that actual max range of a missile so that aspect of "projection" is off the table.
TP have never affected the ROF of the launchers so that takes that aspect of "projection" off the table.
TP have never affected the max damage that a missile has so that aspect of "projection" is off the table.
So this leaves us with the application of damage and TP have always had a serious affect on that.

Since you seem to thnk you are the only one that sees this perhaps you can clarify it so the rest of us can be in on your little secret.


Uh...TP's don't affect missile projection, they affect missile application?

Since when was that a secret? Pretty sure that's common knowledge.


Well, OP seems to not be aware of the fact that bastion module already give way too good projection to the Golem hull, and that it doesn't actually need bigger bonus to that.

French half-noob.

Non, je ne suis pas gentil.
Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
#15 - 2015-10-12 03:07:30 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
I think they should just switch it to a range bonus instead of an amount bonus. It's no good if it can't hit out to cruise missile range. I like to hit my enemies from very, very far away.


Because I got bored, some numbers with respects to a possible range buff in place of the 10%/level effectiveness buff; Variables "O" and "F" are pretty self-explanatory, representing optimal and falloff ranges respectively.

No Bonus to target painter range...
Optimal range = 45Km
Falloff range = 90Km
O+1F = 135Km
O+2F = 225Km

@ 10%/level to target painter range...
Optimal range = 67.5Km (up 22.5Km), same as the Hyena without an effectiveness buff
Falloff range = 135Km (up 45km)
O+1F = 202.5Km (up 67.5Km)
O+2F = 337.5Km (up 112.5Km)

@ 10%/level to target painter optimal range only (no falloff buff), so Hyena without effectiveness buff again...
Optimal range = 67.5Km (up 22.5Km)
Falloff range = 90Km
O+1F = 157.5Km (up 22.5Km)
O+2F = 247.5Km (up 22.5Km)

@ 7.5%/level to target painter range...
Optimal range = 61.875Km (up 16.875Km)
Falloff range = 123.75Km (up 33.75km)
O+1F = 185.625Km (up 50.625Km)
O+2F = 309.375Km (up 84.375Km)

For reference, right now the Golem's locking range is 118.75 with Long Range Targeting maxed, meaning current target painter optimal ranges account for less than half that range at around 38% (assuming I did the math correctly, I'm no arithmetic wizard). Without reducing the buff amount, switching it to a target painter range buff means optimal range would account for nearly 57% locking range. A reduced buff would make the optical ranges just over 52% locking range.

This assumes Meta 4, Faction, and Tech2 TP's with base ranges @ 30Km optimal and 60Km falloff with Frequency Modulation and Long Distance Jamming maxed out. I'm not bored enough for the Tech 1, 'Inception', and other Meta TP's.

"Tomahawks?"

"----in' A, right?"

"Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."

"----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#16 - 2015-10-12 03:29:57 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
I think they should just switch it to a range bonus instead of an amount bonus. It's no good if it can't hit out to cruise missile range. I like to hit my enemies from very, very far away.
I'd rather not lose damage application in the ranges most of my targets actually inhabit, especially considering how rarely they miss in early falloff.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#17 - 2015-10-14 04:36:11 UTC
Haatakan Reppola wrote:
Nyalnara wrote:

No. Because the TP bonus is useful for you AND your potential fleetmates, while the MGC/MGE would only apply to you. (Also, doing that would greatly devalue the Raven Navy which only interest is the way better application.)


Marauders are not "natural" fleet ships, they are more suited for solo play (mainly PvE but some few do PvP with them)


What are you talking about a fleet built around a marauder core is amazing it's the price that tends to limit the use rather than the ship itself

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#18 - 2015-10-14 05:02:34 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Haatakan Reppola wrote:
Nyalnara wrote:

No. Because the TP bonus is useful for you AND your potential fleetmates, while the MGC/MGE would only apply to you. (Also, doing that would greatly devalue the Raven Navy which only interest is the way better application.)


Marauders are not "natural" fleet ships, they are more suited for solo play (mainly PvE but some few do PvP with them)


What are you talking about a fleet built around a marauder core is amazing it's the price that tends to limit the use rather than the ship itself


A fleet built around a Marauder has an extremely weak point.
That Marauder is either an anchor that can't receive any remote assistance, or is extremely weak to ewar if out of bastion.
Unless you're speaking of the alliance tournament, in which case, bastion was banned his year and Marauders performed TERRIBLY without it.


As far as small gang pvp, why? You're just going to get a cyno dropped on you.
Why even large fleet pvp? You'll just get vollied.
The only good use for amMarauder in a fleet is incursions, where their ewar weaknesses make no difference because any target being locked by the NPCs gets jammed, scrammed, webbed, neuted, and whatever else to any ship.
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#19 - 2015-10-14 14:22:45 UTC
Sobaan Tali wrote:
Donnachadh wrote:
Sobaan Tali wrote:
Did we all forget that TP's don't buff missile projection?.

TP have never affect that actual max range of a missile so that aspect of "projection" is off the table.
TP have never affected the ROF of the launchers so that takes that aspect of "projection" off the table.
TP have never affected the max damage that a missile has so that aspect of "projection" is off the table.
So this leaves us with the application of damage and TP have always had a serious affect on that.

Since you seem to thnk you are the only one that sees this perhaps you can clarify it so the rest of us can be in on your little secret.


Uh...TP's don't affect missile projection, they affect missile application?

Since when was that a secret? Pretty sure that's common knowledge.

Me thinks you did not read or did not understand and that may be my fault.
I was not the one that stated that TP affect missile "projection" Sobann Tali did.
I was simply pointing out that TP had no affect on any of those items and so I was wondering how and why Sobaan Tali thought that TP did affect "projection", in fact I still do want to here that explanation since I always thought they affected application.

Moving on and after looking up the definition of "projection" in preparation for this response we have some interesting possibilities.
Projection
The act of throwing or shooting forward.
The act of projecting out from something.
The act of expelling or propelling something out.
If we consider the idea behind missiles is to put damage on target then based on these an argument could be made that TP do indeed affect projection, in that they allow you to more effectively "project" your damage onto the intended target.
Perhaps this is what Sobann Tali was referring to, but I would still like to know.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#20 - 2015-10-14 22:51:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Haatakan Reppola wrote:
Marauders are not "natural" fleet ships, they are more suited for solo play (mainly PvE but some few do PvP with them)

Joe Risalo wrote:
After the upcoming buff to MGCs, they will be close in effectiveness to TPs on a Golem.
Reducing bonus in exchange for a range bonus will only makes MGCs shine more.

Also, they're easier because MGCs don't require target swapping.

Atomeon wrote:
I never understood why Golem has bonus on TPs, this is a minmatar bonus usually.
It seems better to get at MGC bonus.

Tyberius Franklin wrote:
I'd rather not lose damage application in the ranges most of my targets actually inhabit, especially considering how rarely they miss in early falloff.





Missile Guidance Computers are useful for a Golem whether it uses torpedoes or cruise missiles, but a target painter bonus can only be built to serve one of the two. Neither module is better than the other; they are different modules. The Missile Guidance Computer is generally better for the solo ship using only missiles, but target painters affect drones and other fleetmates including their targeting speed.

As the Golem is meant to be a solo ship, I support changing its target painter bonus to a bonus to the use of missile guidance computers. You could continue using it as a fleet PVP ship if you wanted, but its bonuses would no longer be suggesting that it is meant for fleet PVP, because it isn't.

And we need more reasons for tier 3 tech 2 battleships, not less. I'm not satisfied with pidgeonholing Marauders into fleet broadside role.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
12Next page