These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Juno Libertas
Alcoholocaust.
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#2241 - 2013-09-04 22:28:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Juno Libertas
*Edited
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#2242 - 2013-09-04 22:30:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Mara Rinn
CCP Ytterbium wrote:


  • Also, we are removing the mass penalty on the Bastion mode. Tests have shown you can't really turn when it's active anyway, and we don't want to have players abuse that to collapse wormholes.



What about preventing ships with an active bastion module from jumping or using wormholes? We already use MWDs on plated orcas to collapse holes anyway. I don't understand your concern with marauders.

The bastion module should do something useful. Consider at least extending web range, rather than web effectiveness. Perhaps a web strength bonus on the hull, web range bonus on the bastion module?
Cael Autumn
Almost Dangerous
Stranger Danger.
#2243 - 2013-09-04 22:32:49 UTC
I, Cael Autumn, would like to formally dissent to these changes proposed herein.

I would further like to formally refer to said changes as "non-emergent regressive quackery"


What these "non-emergent regressive quackery" attempt to accomplish is merge skirmish tactics with brute-force, maneuverability with immobility, and tankiness with vulnerability. It is a goal not impossible to accomplish, but one that should simply not be accomplished.

It is not feasible in PVP to 'harass" a hostile fleet by jumping in, scooting a hundred kilometers away, then activate a module that immobilizes you for over a minute. Regardless of damage projection bonuses, without ludicrous damage application bonuses, you become a sitting duck waiting to be tackled and killed.

What it does do is create a hard-counter to the sole hindrances in various types of NPC farming, such as Guristas' jamming, Sansha's Tracking Disruption, or Serpentis' Sensor disruption, and make a vessel already obscenely niched for pve, even more so niched.

In this context, niche is the opposite of emergent. Emergent gameplay is critical to the function of a sandbox. You should be given tools to do with what you want, not given tools that can do one thing. If you want marauders to be good at PvE, do so in a manner that makes them viable for those same qualities in other types of gameplay. If you want them to have a drawback, make it one that affects it in all situations (see: sensor strength, doesn't really affect pve, makes them useless in pvp.)

Theorize with me, now, let's give them comparable, hell, let's give them 'good' sensor strengths of around 30 points, and make their drawback their scan resolution. Give the bastion module a bonus to scan resolution to counteract that. It would be a drawback for PVE, causing longer lock times for NPCs, and also give a drawback in PVP.

Now, are we keeping this micro-jump-driving-skirmish gameplay? Then it needs to jump, 'siege' quickly lock up approaching tackle, use damage application (tracking, explosion radius & velocity, etc) to kill it BEFORE it's in web range, then leave siege and warp out.

There's other possible options, like giving them a bonus to ECM burst strength to get-out-of-dodge, or perhaps moving Deep-space industrials +2 warp core strength over to them. Also, the bastion module could instead of being a simple siege-module, lock in the marauders align and velocity similar to the spool up of a mjd, not allowing it to turn around or slow down. That would be more dynamic than current siege mechanisms. A MWD would cycle down by mid-cycle and the marauder would slow down to it's normal speed (or perhaps 50% normal, requiring some re-warp time after exit).

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2244 - 2013-09-04 22:33:14 UTC
Juno Libertas wrote:
Sentient Blade wrote:
So the only real thing which made them useful (the rep amount bonuses) is being replaced with something which only works if you're sat 10km away from the target in the first place (and by extension, scrammed).

Sorry but that's just dumb. These are not mobile ships. Jumping 100km away using MJD does nothing to close 40km on another ship, be it PVE or PVP.


Have to agree here. Marauders just got f**** over in this update.

So why would anyone want to use a Bastion Modules?
- No Resist Bonuses
- No Rep Armor Bonuses (Easier to kill)
- No more Remote Rep
- No Mass Penalty (Open to Bumpage that you cant avoid)

So is CCP telling me that the only bonuses to using a bastion module is that you get better range/falloff along with ewar immunity. ******* awful. At least let them keep their rep bonuses...

Local armor rep is still bonused in bastion. This effectively makes bastion like having the marauder you are used to tank wise and more, only crippled.
Zeus Maximo
Mentally Assured Destruction
The Pursuit of Happiness
#2245 - 2013-09-04 22:33:38 UTC
I never stated that the web bonus should take away from the marauders tank. Every ship in eve should be able to PVE and PVP depending on what the owner wants to do. CCP never said the marauders were meant for purely PVE. It's selfish to think that they are making these things for missions.

I'm all for a damage bonus but the marauders in a pvp situation need to be able to lock down their opponents. The bonused web now allows a pilot to do that but for some reason the PVE "specialists" think its directed at them. Don't fit a web if you don't want one!


Juno Libertas wrote:

So why would anyone want to use a Bastion Modules?
- No Resist Bonuses
- No Rep Armor Bonuses (Easier to kill)
- No more Remote Rep
- No Mass Penalty (Open to Bumpage that you cant avoid)


Marauders just got a 100% rep bonus......
Marauders just got t2 resists
Don't use bastion mode if you want RR
Don't rely on the stations EHP to save you.

"It is not possible either to trick or escape the mind of Zeus."

U-MAD Membership Recruitment

PoH Corporation Recruitment

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2246 - 2013-09-04 22:40:00 UTC
Zeus Maximo wrote:
I never stated that the web bonus should take away from the marauders tank. Every ship in eve should be able to PVE and PVP depending on what the owner wants to do. CCP never said the marauders were meant for purely PVE. It's selfish to think that they are making these things for missions.

I'm all for a damage bonus but the marauders in a pvp situation need to be able to lock down their opponents. The bonused web now allows a pilot to do that but for some reason the PVE "specialists" think its directed at them. Don't fit a web if you don't want one!

Which would be a glorious solution if it could be used in reverse for the rep bonus. But it can't as we have gained nothing that would allow us to make it up outside of bastion. What this means is that today's working Paladin config doesn't work under the proposed in a situation you would actually use it. It's a total loss for every active tank config outside of bastion including those with webs since that bonus was reduced as well. T2 resists are largely meaningless when you know you won't be tanking that damage.
Ravasta Helugo
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#2247 - 2013-09-04 22:40:12 UTC
Cael Autumn wrote:
I, Cael Autumn, would like to formally dissent to these changes proposed herein.

I would further like to formally refer to said changes as "non-emergent regressive quackery"

Hear hear! Tip of the hat, Sir. Good show, wot wot! Excellent form!
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#2248 - 2013-09-04 22:41:46 UTC
CCP. Could you explain what use you actually see these ships seeing?
And how the new stats fill those roles any better than the current stats do?

The only spot I can see improved slightly is Paladins in Incursions (Outside Bastion mode).
Bastion mode also makes them the go to ship for crazy EWar heavy PvE missions.

However I see literally zero PvP application. The reason battleships hardly ever get used for PvP and people prefer the T3 cruisers, shield nano BC gangs or smaller ships often is straight up mobility. A Battleship fleet has to be large enough to take a blap dread hotdrop and have it's own cyno in the wings with it's own dreads & carriers also. Otherwise it will get shadowed & tackled by a faster more manoeuvrable fleet.

Marauders are now even worse at this than they already were before this update.

So. I see even less PvP being done in Marauders than currently is.

I think an explanation of your actual vision for how these ships should be used in general game play, not just a once a month outing, but how you expect a pilot to use them in a daily fashion is needed. Not just a bunch of stats.
Mr Floydy
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#2249 - 2013-09-04 22:43:12 UTC
Complaints at losing tank in non bastion mode are entertaining. Everyone constantly bitches that armour/shield boost bonuses are terrible and that resist bonuses are better. So we get the T2 bonuses that from memory are about as strong if not better than a 4% resist bonus and people complain! RR Logi is going to be very strong on these ships now. This is a huge buff from before even ignoring the bastion module.
Ravasta Helugo
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#2250 - 2013-09-04 22:45:38 UTC
Mr Floydy wrote:
Complaints at losing tank in non bastion mode are entertaining. Everyone constantly bitches that armour/shield boost bonuses are terrible and that resist bonuses are better. So we get the T2 bonuses that from memory are about as strong if not better than a 4% resist bonus and people complain! RR Logi is going to be very strong on these ships now. This is a huge buff from before even ignoring the bastion module.

PvPer's complain. Incursion runners complain.

The Rep boost bonus has always been what sets these ships apart from Pirate Battleships for mission running, and now it's been severely gimped. T2 resists are pointless in 80% of missions, or 100% if you're Amarr.
Rek Seven
The Persuaders
#2251 - 2013-09-04 22:49:14 UTC
I think CCP need some more time to think this through...
Patrice Macmahon
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#2252 - 2013-09-04 22:52:15 UTC
I am one of the few people in this thread that probably has actually trained Muraders to V and uses them for their intended PVE purpose. And after reading this, and many of the suggested follow up posts - I've got mixed feelings. Most of them negative (unfortunately).

I see bad game design repeating itself - Semi - Spammable Micro Jump Drives ----> Ultimate Kiter.... If this isn't bad, why the nano nerf?

I see a ship role repeating itself - We just got new hulls that fill this position - Tier 3 Battle Cruisers

I have some serious reservations about the existing proposals. They sound neet, but it also sounds strikingly similar to another role that currently exists - Tier 3 Battle Cruisers.

Tier 3's are supposed to be the Kiting, At range boats - utilizing large caibre weapons. A tier 3 Battle cruiser, just off it's 8 large guns, already pushes out the same DPS as it's equivalent Murader. With a MWD it's faster and dictates range better - and is far cheeper. Why would I want to utilize 1-2 muraders doing this when I can have 20 Tier 3's?

Forcing a fit to rely on the Micro Drive and Long range artillery support - means the ship is going to become fragile... As people fit tracking and damage mods... And to put yet another super kiting fleet on the board is going to produce more player based complaints... Isn't the inability to catch your target what caused player base frustration and the Nano Nerf several years ago?

****

The 'triage' module (Lets call it what it is for simplicity) - is an interesting idea. And level V's just became easier to accomplish with a dedicated, single ship uber tanker - no logi required. But again, the relative short range on the webs mean output DPS from these "Bastions of Defense" immobile defense stations just became a non issue.

Triage carriers, from my understanding, are only really used in POS repair situation, or by logi carriers in large fleet fights. And super caps going into 'triage' do it when they are un-harassed and are POS bowling. No one actively commits a triaged capital to a live combat situation without the express mindset that the ship in question - is going to go boom.

So you want to do this to a battleship? that can cost as much as a small carrier? So we have new skills and new modules - that won't be committed to a fight in a practical sense, and take the Murader out of it's only current effective niche role - Mission Running.


********

The Murader currently has a very strong PVP backbone and intelligent bonuses for PVP without being horribly broken. The one MAJOR flaw is that the sensor strength is so low that light drones jam them. This is one focal point is the primary reason Muraders are not utilized in fleet combat, are not deployed to wormholes, and will never leave high sec. A gallente Frigate can reliably jam these beasties out. Do a hot fix, push those sensor strengths over 20 (like you did the HAC's), and you would instantly see Muraders suddenly becoming fielded and utilized across new eden.

The ships aren't perfect. The web bonus (which is great for PVP, not for PVE) then make sense, as the muraders become close range brawlers of doom, but still kited, and shot down by the kiting ships (Tier 3's).

As far as the graphical transformation - I have a sinking suspicion that the art department has been tasked. The shiny has had money spent on it, which means that feature (good or bad) is probably already in the pipeline and cannot be stopped.

CCP, please consider putting that on a Clone

**********

CCP, guys, split the ship hull. Give us two variants. Something similar to the old (current), and THEN go play with the new wonky, I will jump into two bad ideas at once.

Try a re-balance on the Muraders BEFORE your do a re-design.

PVE Reballance - Mission runners don't use webs, we use dual tracking links and long range guns. Change the Web Speed Bonus to something else. A simple change to making it a Web RANGE bonus instead would make it ver viable.

KEEP our tractor range - We shoot out stuff at 40+++ KM (My kronos shoots out missions at 80+ KM, with my sentries hitting at those ranges). That 40km tractor beem really does make a difference in completion times and convience of use. (Yes, We paid for a 1.0-3.0 billion isk ship for convience. Were old foggy crotchety eve players, we deserve a little reward in ease of use).

I don't know how putting T2 resists on my boat will compare to my 37.5% repair bonus. I need to be able to tank level IV's and still put damage modifiers on my ship. Weigh that carefully please.


********

How to get a Murader to PVP
How to get a Murader to leave High Sec

Push Sensor Strength to over 20 like you did our Hacs.


Pirate Navy Ships are still faster, do more DPS and have far more "Fun" slots for more interesting layouts. They are still the natural counter to a Murader.

Unleash the Murader as it currently is, I think you guys will be pleasantly surpised at just how well they will mesh and jive with the existing Ship Landscape as they are currently written.

The only major point of ship re-balance I see needing to happen to keep muraders from perma tanking / cur their cargo bays in half or more.




******

That's how you address a re-balance.

Push the re-design to another hull.

PLEASE:

Re-Balance FIRST

Re-Design SECOND

 "Much of this is crystallised in our philosophy, or as others call it "the Intaki Faith". We simply call it Ida - the literal translation is "to consider", and is a good description of the Intaki." 

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2253 - 2013-09-04 22:53:10 UTC
Mr Floydy wrote:
Complaints at losing tank in non bastion mode are entertaining. Everyone constantly bitches that armour/shield boost bonuses are terrible and that resist bonuses are better. So we get the T2 bonuses that from memory are about as strong if not better than a 4% resist bonus and people complain! RR Logi is going to be very strong on these ships now. This is a huge buff from before even ignoring the bastion module.

No, a 4% resist bonus is better as it helps no matter what is hitting you. It would make the vargur more viable to all the factions in can hit the resist holes of. It would allow the Paladin to benefit against EM using factions, which are it's primary focus being heavy EM bound. RR setups will be stronger, but why are you using marauders with RR? Pirate vessels have better DPS and the Vindi has better webs. This is part of the issue, the changes push the ships into areas where they are already outperformed at the cost of performing well where they already do.
Cade Windstalker
#2254 - 2013-09-04 23:00:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Cade Windstalker
MBizon Osis wrote:
I am not sure what they want. I sure don't think all this is Re-balancing any more it's a whole new concept and as such deserves it's own class. Not shoehorned into the current marauder class, but something original on another ship hull IMHO.


I understand this argument, I just don't agree with it. The Marauders have always been good at tanking, regardless of what the obsolete in-game description for the class says. Adding things to buff that and bring them up to a full T2 specialization is not at all out of line with the ships.

Bastion is going to be divisive but overall it's a cool idea and fits with the class as its been in the past.

hmskrecik wrote:
Here I don't agree. I've been flying exclusively Gallente stuff since I registered and only until quite recently when I crossed to Minnie gear. And I know all too well how this 10% explosive resist hurts. The thing is that for given skill set, fitting, etc. you can tank, say, Serpentis with one hardener while for Angels you need 2 or 3. Not a big problem in itself, it's just you have to plan your fitting accordingly (for me it meant dropping a magstab sometimes). Meanwhile with Vargur you can safely allocate fixed amount of slots, usually 1 or 2, for tanking resists and you're ready to go, everywhere. Everywhere you dare to go, that is.


Yes, the problem is that you're condemning two of the four to having to fit more mods against most rats, where as with T1 hulls it's much more even and entirely based on what resist type you're tanking on. If a Paladin wants to make use of its explosive resists it need to be fighting Rogue Drones (which pay poorly overall) or Angels where the two best damage types to deal are the ones it can't deal.

The Vargur is in a somewhat better place by being able to swap damage types fairly freely but still has to fit more mods against most rats than either the Gallente or Caldari do.
Hanna Cyrus
Spessart Rebellen
#2255 - 2013-09-04 23:00:44 UTC
Please. it's still one ship class to balance with one application, which is designed for.

Here a a few group of people, who wants a perfect mission runner for Lvl4, the next group want a perfect ship for incursion, the next a perfect plex/anno runner and so on... and an other group wants to make these ship class a viable PVP ship.

Now, what stay this class for? One ship class can't be over the top in all disciplines!

I for myself enjoy Marauders how are they now, a little fixing here and there and it's ok.

But i like the idea of a "modus" the ship performs in an other way, what i dont't like is the sitting duck idea.
I think we shouldn't get lost in details. Lets them do there Job, they done mostly good rebalancing, trsust them, let us test then und then we can constructive criticism them.

I'm lucky to be not the one, who has to rebalance this class.
Oberus MacKenzie
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#2256 - 2013-09-04 23:07:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Oberus MacKenzie
I really liked what CCP was trying to do in the first place. Make a T2 battleship, which is supposed to be awesome, that is only PvE oriented into something that also has PvP applications. The original concept for the bastion module was on the right track, in my opinion. It gave the marauder solo PvP potential and increased it's application in wormholes, plexes and level 5's at the cost of being forced to commit to one position for 60+ seconds and a hypervulnerability when not in bastion mode.

The revised bastion stats require about the same number of defensive fitting slots for PvE as is required now, the tank is a little better than the status quo but not by enough to make it worth the ISK risk in PvP or higher end PvE, it leaves the ship even more vulnerable when not in bastion mode than the first iteration and the hull has an extremely questionable web bonus where it could have something else. In PvE, nothing bigger than a frigate gets within 20km of a marauder and drones typically deal with the frigates.

I can pretty safely say that with the new stats I would never even think about putting a marauder into PvP. We're talking about a 1b ISK hull (not including mods) that requires a lot of extra training, doesn't work well in a fleet, is highly susceptible to alpha and has to be locked in place for a relatively long time in order to operate at its full capacity. Using a marauder to solo rather than something like a hyperion or maelstrom would be on par with using a freighter rather than a shuttle to fly to the back end of Syndicate.

Lastly, I don't think it makes sense for the bastion mod to not use fuel. Marauders already have a giant cargo bay that can accomodate a little fuel. Or hell, maybe even give them a small fuel bay to store the bastion fuel as well as the LO they will need for the cyno they will inevitably be wearing.
Besides, there is an excessive supply of heavy water and almost no demand for it, so making it a fuel used by mission runners would go a long way to helping it become a profitable resource and indirectly influence the cost of other ice products (increased profitability -> more miners -> more market competition -> lower/more stable isotope prices).

The original bastion idea had benefits that matched or outweighed the drawbacks. The new bastion idea has drawbacks which greatly outweigh the benefits. If the changes on the table are implemented I will be seriously considering whether to sell my marauder and, according to CCP's ship progression, "downgrade" to a navy battleship to get a better tool for PvE. Something about that doesn't seem right...

My griping about changes without making suggestions is about as useless as the paladin's capacitor bonus (cap boosters: we use them), so if I was king for a day I would:
- get rid of the web bonus in favor of some variation of a defense bonus (or if that's not an option at least change golem/vargur to web range for variety)
- change the paladin's capacitor bonus to a damage application bonus (tracking or ROF)
- swap the golem's TP bonus for a built-in explosion radius bonus (5% or so) and drop one mid for one low
- apply T2 resists
- give the bastion mod a mild damage application bonus (20% to tracking, 10% to explosion vel+rad)
- make the bastion module use 25 heavy water per cycle
- someone mentioned a probe strength bonus and ability to fit expanded probe launcher, which is a fantastic idea
- get rid of the MJD bonus (great idea for the blackops revision, though!) and make it able to warp out of bubbles (like T3's with an interdiction nullifier)
Mournful Conciousness
Embers Children
#2257 - 2013-09-04 23:08:21 UTC
Hanna Cyrus wrote:

I'm lucky to be not the one, who has to rebalance this class.


Never a truer word said. Which is odd really, since apparently hardly anyone flies a marauder. Why are we all so worked up over this? We should be out there killing each other in the new HACs and Command Ships!

BTW: me and a corp-mate bagged 2 tengus in a wormhole tonight - with a damnation and a hyperion. First blood for the new damnation \o/ - it worked well.

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".

Juno Libertas
Alcoholocaust.
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#2258 - 2013-09-04 23:13:22 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Juno Libertas wrote:
Sentient Blade wrote:
So the only real thing which made them useful (the rep amount bonuses) is being replaced with something which only works if you're sat 10km away from the target in the first place (and by extension, scrammed).

Sorry but that's just dumb. These are not mobile ships. Jumping 100km away using MJD does nothing to close 40km on another ship, be it PVE or PVP.


Have to agree here. Marauders just got f**** over in this update.

So why would anyone want to use a Bastion Modules?
- No Resist Bonuses
- No Rep Armor Bonuses (Easier to kill)
- No more Remote Rep
- No Mass Penalty (Open to Bumpage that you cant avoid)

So is CCP telling me that the only bonuses to using a bastion module is that you get better range/falloff along with ewar immunity. ******* awful. At least let them keep their rep bonuses...

Local armor rep is still bonused in bastion. This effectively makes bastion like having the marauder you are used to tank wise and more, only crippled.


Just caught that and deleted my post but IMHO Mass penalty should still be back and just disabled on jumping gates/wormholes.
Omnathious Deninard
Ministry of Silly Walks.
The Gurlstas Associates
#2259 - 2013-09-04 23:14:15 UTC
If you want to remove the rep bonus from the hull leave the resist bonus from the bastion module.

If you want to remove the mass penalty from the bastion module, leave us with mobility just no warp drive.

I personally preferred the lower omni-resistances with a higher rep amount so that I could go wherever the stars lead me and not worry about what rats I will encounter and if my tank will be ok for them.

The ships still need a way to not become a 1b+ KM every time they enter low sec.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

DeadRow
Phoenix Naval Operations
Phoenix Naval Systems
#2260 - 2013-09-04 23:14:24 UTC
Well, thanks for the useless bonus I guess.

Bastion gives you Optimal and Falloff bonus which makes you think LR weapons, yet now you want us to stay within 10km. Golem getting a TP and web bonus sounds doubly aweful too.

*sigh* Still a few months yet, hopefully they'll get unborked.