These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

Marauder Overhaul, Carriers OP

Author
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#21 - 2016-09-04 14:04:50 UTC
At this point reducing the materials needed to build the marauders would likely have no affect on how much they cost, even if they were cheaper to make those who make them would likely still sell them for the same and pocket the difference and to be honest it would be stupid of them if they did not.
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#22 - 2016-09-05 00:20:00 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:



Here is a table of isk efficiencies of golems and t1 carriers:

Golem: 29%
Kronos: 42%
Paladin: 35%
Vargur: 39%

Chimera: 74.9%
Thanatos: 74.9%
Archon: 77%
Nidhoggur: 83%


Numbers don't lie
Zhilia Mann
Tide Way Out Productions
#23 - 2016-09-05 05:17:50 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:



Here is a table of isk efficiencies of golems and t1 carriers:

Golem: 29%
Kronos: 42%
Paladin: 35%
Vargur: 39%

Chimera: 74.9%
Thanatos: 74.9%
Archon: 77%
Nidhoggur: 83%


Numbers don't lie


Well, not usually. These appear not to. But they require people to interpret them and it seems like everyone else in the thread has a different interpretation than you do.
Tsukino Stareine
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#24 - 2016-09-05 07:15:19 UTC
Numbers don't lie, but people do ;)

An explanation for such numbers is this: zkill has recorded efficiency through the last 5-6 years where carriers have been used in large fleet doctrines within null sec. They were extremely successful and hence their high efficiency.

Marauders were all but useless until the addition of bastion, almost no one flew them in pvp and most kill mails involving one is them being ganked


So yes, numbers don't lie. But the person presenting them with no context to attempt to reinforce a poor argument sure is.
aldhura
Blackjack and Exotic Dancers
Top Tier
#25 - 2016-09-05 09:05:04 UTC
Can't have a carrier in hs. T3's and snakes are in no way better than marauders.
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#26 - 2016-09-05 11:08:40 UTC
Tsukino Stareine wrote:
Numbers don't lie, but people do ;)

An explanation for such numbers is this: zkill has recorded efficiency through the last 5-6 years where carriers have been used in large fleet doctrines within null sec. They were extremely successful and hence their high efficiency.

Marauders were all but useless until the addition of bastion, almost no one flew them in pvp and most kill mails involving one is them being ganked


So yes, numbers don't lie. But the person presenting them with no context to attempt to reinforce a poor argument sure is.


Month of August:

Golem 29.55%
Kronos 39.7%
Vargur 52.7%
Paladin 33.7%


Thanatos 73.3%
Chimera 67.8%
Archon 87.1%
Nidhoggur 58.9% (which this would be a story in itself, having dropped 20% in isk efficiency in august from the previous three months 80% average)

All of these ships show steady numbers near what's listed here. Vargu looks ok sitting around an average of 45%-50%, but the Nidhoggur sits around 70% usually.

Either way, marauder sux.


Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
#27 - 2016-09-05 13:50:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Zan Shiro
Divine Entervention wrote:

Either way, marauder sux.





Its a pve ship, not pvp one. yes it will suck for pvp. When I have seen it used like it had issues. AT a few years back. match broke down the most pure pvp you can have. 1 v 1. Marauder versus....well marauder. And CCP had to apply reverse TIDI. They had to sped up the combat speed. Worth noting following AT (and probably this one, haven't read over the lists tbh) marauders were banned from AT. Probably because on full reverse tidi the match went on and on an on.

I view AT as more pure pvp in some aspects. No reinforcements, no refits, no peon rush...aka blobbing the crap out of people.. No caps...lol. Mindless F1 spam monkey play will lose. And you see some cool ass comps we can't get in normal play. Still remember camel empire's 3 widow comp....thing of beauty (to a widow pilot anyway) we can't get in normal eve pvp.


It has been and still is a pve BS. 0.0 pve less so maybe. bastion ia a pita non blues pop up out of nowhere I will grant. Thats a 0.0 thing, signed up for when you go there, These are loved and more than fine in empire. For the cost you can run a pure t2 setup and be fine. Something even pirate or faction can't do (rattler can sort of...but active tanks run much better with shiny mods I have found).

Pirate hulls are cheaper now....some mods needed though get that price knocking on 800-900' mil's door all the same real quick. Marauder just skips all that foreplay at 1.2 bil and chump change for the t2 mods.

My kronos tank fit I ran as an example: LAR II, RAH, SS EANM (cheapish cost, had it laying around even and t2 almost just as fine really). Heavy injector II with 400's in mids (very rarely needed tbh). DCU II as well. Scan ships and mods this would be considered overtanked by many. Its 3 tank mods....no cap injection. My fit was in case I met new friends. Live long enough to hopefully see concord pop them was the idea.

This tank on vindi, mega ( navy included),.....not cutting it. Hell you can't really get a good t2 only vindi fit. They require shiny to clear grids really. Pirate bubble burst...but that vindi hull with shiny mods creeps up to 800-900 easy.
Tsukino Stareine
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#28 - 2016-09-05 15:03:05 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
Tsukino Stareine wrote:
Numbers don't lie, but people do ;)

An explanation for such numbers is this: zkill has recorded efficiency through the last 5-6 years where carriers have been used in large fleet doctrines within null sec. They were extremely successful and hence their high efficiency.

Marauders were all but useless until the addition of bastion, almost no one flew them in pvp and most kill mails involving one is them being ganked


So yes, numbers don't lie. But the person presenting them with no context to attempt to reinforce a poor argument sure is.


Month of August:

Golem 29.55%
Kronos 39.7%
Vargur 52.7%
Paladin 33.7%


Thanatos 73.3%
Chimera 67.8%
Archon 87.1%
Nidhoggur 58.9% (which this would be a story in itself, having dropped 20% in isk efficiency in august from the previous three months 80% average)

All of these ships show steady numbers near what's listed here. Vargu looks ok sitting around an average of 45%-50%, but the Nidhoggur sits around 70% usually.

Either way, marauder sux.




So on average the efficiency for carriers have gone down apart from the archon outlier and marauders have gone up. Completely expected and explained by what I said.
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#29 - 2016-09-06 11:18:47 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
Khan Wrenth wrote:
I love my Marauders. They are the most perfectly balanced ships in the game. Each one is pretty much perfect in it's own right. Keep your ****ing hands off them.


I disagree.

I feel the benefits do not justify the cost.




You never stated what you want to use them for. They have some pretty awesome pvp uses in wh space. They can fit through wh that carriers can't and you can put several through wh compared to carriers.

If you weren't totally focused on crap ratting - you would see they are a healthy ship class in a healthy place. Note every billion isk ship needs to farm anoms.
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#30 - 2016-09-06 13:37:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Morrigan LeSante
Divine Entervention wrote:
I feel Marauders need something to justify pilots choosing them over other ships.


I can't put my carrier through mission gates.
I cant repackage my carrier and jump freight it about
I can have my carrier DPS destroyed
I don't need to spend hundreds of millions on items to make a marauder work.
I could go on...

HTH.
Lan Wang
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#31 - 2016-09-06 15:45:47 UTC
when you factor in insurance a carrier is cheaper Big smile

Domination Nephilim - Angel Cartel

Calm down miner. As you pointed out, people think they can get away with stuff they would not in rl... Like for example illegal mining... - Ima Wreckyou*

Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
#32 - 2016-09-06 22:57:28 UTC
The cost in ISK is not up to CCP, nor a reasonable factor in balancing. Give it up, buddy. Marauders are fine where they are.

They are indeed more expensive now than they have been in the past, to the point that they might cost more than a Carrier (don't know Carrier costs, I don't fly them). Problem is, like others have continually pointed out, Marauders and Carriers are two completely different types of ships in Eve meant for two completely different roles. Changing the build cost, even If any of us agreed with you that something must be done, would hardly do much as that assumes build cost is the only factor in who players buy and sell. You're trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist. If the benefits do not justify the cost in your eyes, then don't buy one and look for something else that does or make one yourself.

"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."

TomyLobo
U2EZ
#33 - 2016-09-08 05:17:48 UTC
With the right mods, carriers will tank way more than a marauder can dream of tanking.
Christopher Mabata
Northern Accounts and Systems
#34 - 2016-09-09 01:45:26 UTC
You made the age old mistake OP of assuming that the price sets the precedent for ship capability, if this were the case then there would be much less in terms of defined roles and tier-ecide in the game. Its called balancing and while CCP doesn't always land it smack on the chops the first time around ( or the 10th ) they still do well showcasing what a ship should and shouldn't be able to do.

No one ship should do everything, and as always price is a 3rd party factor and plays 0% in what the ship does or will do in terms of the hull. Modules on the other hand is a totally different animal.

♣ Small Gang PVP, Large Fleet PVP, Black Ops, Incursions, Trade, and Industry ♣ 70% Lethal / 30% Super-Snuggly / 110% No idea what im doing ♣

This Message Brought to you by a sweet and sour bittervet

Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#35 - 2016-09-11 03:58:29 UTC
Every single person who's spoken in this thread against a buff to marauders has posted from an account with zero evidence of PvPing with one.
Tsukino Stareine
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#36 - 2016-09-11 04:30:20 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
Every single person who's spoken in this thread against a buff to marauders has posted from an account with zero evidence of PvPing with one.

Do you need some gloves to grasp at those straws better?
Christopher Mabata
Northern Accounts and Systems
#37 - 2016-09-11 04:59:49 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
Every single person who's spoken in this thread against a buff to marauders has posted from an account with zero evidence of PvPing with one.


You seem to be forgetting that you also tried to say a T2 Battleship which happens to be weapons platform based, should be as good as a capital class fighter-carrier formerly drone ship based solely on the fact that they usually cost within a 100m ISK of each other depending on supply and demand and that the latter needs an improvement to justify this.

Literally this is like buying plantains at the supermarket and then returning them because they didn't ripen into bananas despite them being clearly labelled otherwise.

♣ Small Gang PVP, Large Fleet PVP, Black Ops, Incursions, Trade, and Industry ♣ 70% Lethal / 30% Super-Snuggly / 110% No idea what im doing ♣

This Message Brought to you by a sweet and sour bittervet

Lan Wang
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#38 - 2016-09-12 08:08:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Lan Wang
Divine Entervention wrote:
Every single person who's spoken in this thread against a buff to marauders has posted from an account with zero evidence of PvPing with one.


they dont need buffed...and ive pvp'd in them

Domination Nephilim - Angel Cartel

Calm down miner. As you pointed out, people think they can get away with stuff they would not in rl... Like for example illegal mining... - Ima Wreckyou*

Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
#39 - 2016-09-13 16:47:37 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
I disagree.

I feel the benefits do not justify the cost.


then don't buy one

/thread
Marcus Tedric
Zebra Corp
Goonswarm Federation
#40 - 2016-09-13 16:56:33 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
............. Their hulls cost roughly the same as a carrier, yet they're far less capable..............


There's your problem - right there!

Try the cost of an equivalent fit.

But no, carriers cost more when just hulls - and then add fighters........and......

Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium

Previous page123Next page