These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#3081 - 2013-09-07 13:59:35 UTC
Roime wrote:
Trinkets friend wrote:

That's fine, to my mind. But dropping the Marauder's rep bonus for T2 resists is not. It favours tanking some rats, and leaves you with shite performance against others (and some missions where, eg, Angels employ EM turrets, etc). This isn't always sufficient to realistically rely on bastion; you just get 2 effective reppers and the same achilles heel resist holes.

That is what this hooplah is about.

Bastion mode and everything is more or less fine in iteration 2. The real problem has been the gutting of the rep bonus for useless webs and applying T2 resists. This benefits nothing.


They had to gut it because it was OP for niche situations and of very limited use outside those situations. Replacing it with T2 expands marauder usability, while still keeping bastion tanking viable. It works much better with logi now.

I can see how the web bonus is useless for LR fits, but it's extremely powerful on close range fits.

T2 resists and webs benefit PVP applications.



Close range fits for a ship with MJD and extended range bonus? And then sacrifice tank for that "short range effectiveness"?

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you
Gimme more Cynos
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#3082 - 2013-09-07 14:07:08 UTC
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
Roime wrote:
Trinkets friend wrote:

That's fine, to my mind. But dropping the Marauder's rep bonus for T2 resists is not. It favours tanking some rats, and leaves you with shite performance against others (and some missions where, eg, Angels employ EM turrets, etc). This isn't always sufficient to realistically rely on bastion; you just get 2 effective reppers and the same achilles heel resist holes.

That is what this hooplah is about.

Bastion mode and everything is more or less fine in iteration 2. The real problem has been the gutting of the rep bonus for useless webs and applying T2 resists. This benefits nothing.


They had to gut it because it was OP for niche situations and of very limited use outside those situations. Replacing it with T2 expands marauder usability, while still keeping bastion tanking viable. It works much better with logi now.

I can see how the web bonus is useless for LR fits, but it's extremely powerful on close range fits.

T2 resists and webs benefit PVP applications.



Close range fits for a ship with MJD and extended range bonus? And then sacrifice tank for that "short range effectiveness"?


I would say Long-Range fits with the option to effectively brawl, and suddenly, it all makes sense, doesn't it?
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#3083 - 2013-09-07 14:10:43 UTC
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:

Close range fits for a ship with MJD and extended range bonus? And then sacrifice tank for that "short range effectiveness"?


Yep, MJD that can be used after each bastion cycle allows you to instantly blink to the next spawn, and the extended range extends the effective range of brawler fits. You have better tank due to the resists and bonuses, which allows you to fit a web. And it doesn't affect the tank or armor marauders.

.
Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#3084 - 2013-09-07 14:18:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Nano Quantum
Gimme more Cynos wrote:
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
Roime wrote:
Trinkets friend wrote:

That's fine, to my mind. But dropping the Marauder's rep bonus for T2 resists is not. It favours tanking some rats, and leaves you with shite performance against others (and some missions where, eg, Angels employ EM turrets, etc). This isn't always sufficient to realistically rely on bastion; you just get 2 effective reppers and the same achilles heel resist holes.

That is what this hooplah is about.

Bastion mode and everything is more or less fine in iteration 2. The real problem has been the gutting of the rep bonus for useless webs and applying T2 resists. This benefits nothing.


They had to gut it because it was OP for niche situations and of very limited use outside those situations. Replacing it with T2 expands marauder usability, while still keeping bastion tanking viable. It works much better with logi now.

I can see how the web bonus is useless for LR fits, but it's extremely powerful on close range fits.

T2 resists and webs benefit PVP applications.



Close range fits for a ship with MJD and extended range bonus? And then sacrifice tank for that "short range effectiveness"?


I would say Long-Range fits with the option to effectively brawl, and suddenly, it all makes sense, doesn't it?

Only for half the marauders it does. Kronos and Paladin have viable close range fits. Golem torp fits are downright crap in comparison to a Kronos short range fit. Golem with cruise is really the best way to go and only way less you are "special".A Kronos short range fit out ranges Golem torp fit. Less they make substantial changes to the missiles launcher weapons systems via xxx buff modification. If you are brawling with a long range fit you are doing it wrong anyway and should lose your ship for using ill advised tactics not for ill advised pvp rebalance of your ship. Torps need to be improved otherwise a web bonus goes to waste on the Golem and the bonus out to be an explosion velocity one instead of webs to have the same desired effect but actually being of some help.
Gimme more Cynos
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#3085 - 2013-09-07 14:34:47 UTC
Nano Quantum wrote:
Gimme more Cynos wrote:
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
Roime wrote:
Trinkets friend wrote:

That's fine, to my mind. But dropping the Marauder's rep bonus for T2 resists is not. It favours tanking some rats, and leaves you with shite performance against others (and some missions where, eg, Angels employ EM turrets, etc). This isn't always sufficient to realistically rely on bastion; you just get 2 effective reppers and the same achilles heel resist holes.

That is what this hooplah is about.

Bastion mode and everything is more or less fine in iteration 2. The real problem has been the gutting of the rep bonus for useless webs and applying T2 resists. This benefits nothing.


They had to gut it because it was OP for niche situations and of very limited use outside those situations. Replacing it with T2 expands marauder usability, while still keeping bastion tanking viable. It works much better with logi now.

I can see how the web bonus is useless for LR fits, but it's extremely powerful on close range fits.

T2 resists and webs benefit PVP applications.



Close range fits for a ship with MJD and extended range bonus? And then sacrifice tank for that "short range effectiveness"?


I would say Long-Range fits with the option to effectively brawl, and suddenly, it all makes sense, doesn't it?

Only for half the marauders it does. Kronos and Paladin have viable close range fits. Golem torp fits are downright crap in comparison to a Kronos short range fit. Golem with cruise is really the best way to go and only way less you are "special".A Kronos short range fit out ranges Golem torp fit. Less they make substantial changes to the missiles launcher weapons systems via xxx buff modification. If you are brawling with a long range fit you are doing it wrong anyway and should lose your ship for using ill advised tactics not for ill advised pvp rebalance of your ship. Torps need to be improved otherwise a web bonus goes to waste on the Golem and the bonus out to be an explosion velocity one instead of webs to have the same desired effect but actually being of some help.


Don't know if you have noticed that close range turrets can reach amazing distances in bastion, and with bastion, it's not so unlikely that you will end up in close range situations - that's where the MJD shines. If you're pointed, get rid of it with webs..

Yes, the Torp-Golem is kinda crappy with these changes, but still - Javelins will reach excessive range for torps too.

Thus, marauders are actually valid longe-range plattforms with these changes, even in close combat situations. Can't see why it's so hard to see the concept..

Snipe aslong as you can, tank a heavy beating if someone comes close, kill the point and MJD away. AND yes, this is a nice concept imho. It allmost looks like a solo pwn-mobile with solid counters (ECM drones (LOL) and neuts/Alpha).
CanI haveyourstuff
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#3086 - 2013-09-07 14:36:41 UTC
Gimme more Cynos wrote:
Yes, the Torp-Golem is kinda crappy with these changes, but still - Javelins will reach excessive range for torps too.


there is no reason to use javelin torp over simple T2 cruise. Sadly.
marVLs
#3087 - 2013-09-07 14:49:53 UTC
CanI haveyourstuff wrote:
Gimme more Cynos wrote:
Yes, the Torp-Golem is kinda crappy with these changes, but still - Javelins will reach excessive range for torps too.


there is no reason to use javelin torp over simple T2 cruise. Sadly.



That's why i would like to change Golem bonuses only for torps

At least 20% per level torps velo

It's really bad that to match even not enough range You must fit all rigs with velo rigs... Not even in bastion range will be satisfied...

Someone can say: so use cruise missiles. True, they're awesome right now, but torps need love, they're used only on bombers, and only because that's forced.

Maybe if CCP is planning to bring to us missile mods like tracking computers, then change TP bonus for that missile tracking computer thing bonus ;)
Gimme more Cynos
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#3088 - 2013-09-07 14:52:31 UTC
marVLs wrote:
CanI haveyourstuff wrote:
Gimme more Cynos wrote:
Yes, the Torp-Golem is kinda crappy with these changes, but still - Javelins will reach excessive range for torps too.


there is no reason to use javelin torp over simple T2 cruise. Sadly.



That's why i would like to change Golem bonuses only for torps

At least 20% per level torps velo

It's really bad that to match even not enough range You must fit all rigs with velo rigs... Not even in bastion range will be satisfied...

Someone can say: so use cruise missiles. True, they're awesome right now, but torps need love, they're used only on bombers, and only because that's forced.

Maybe if CCP is planning to bring to us missile mods like tracking computers, then change TP bonus for that missile tracking computer thing bonus ;)


well, CCP Rise gave us a hint on new modules for missiles - let's wait what those will do.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#3089 - 2013-09-07 15:13:14 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:

We wish to expand their use to PvP as well. Of course, their high price, low mobility will always ensure their role remains a niche one

What happened to this?
It would seem as this progresses people want there PVP role to be more and more predominant.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Mer88
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#3090 - 2013-09-07 15:20:19 UTC
what about removing the web bonus and give a 10% target painter bonus per level instead? a BS shouldnt even use a web because it is so slow to get close to anyone in the first place. A target painter give you so much more range and helps tracking so much better.
Wolfgang Achari
Morior Invictus.
#3091 - 2013-09-07 15:20:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Wolfgang Achari
Why not roll the web bonus into the Sebastian module, but make it a range bonus. This way you can give a rep bonus back to the marauders, but instead of doing rep amount bonus why not provide a 7.5% nanite usage bonus for AAR's and a 6% cap booster capacity bonus to ASB's? Keeping the 100% bonus in Sebastian mode. Combined with a proper T2 resist profile you give players a reason to still use normal reps, but give them a good advantage when using charged reps.

*Just thought I should add that this would give AAR's 11 cycles and ASB's 12 cycles.
MBizon Osis
Doomheim
#3092 - 2013-09-07 15:38:30 UTC
Roime wrote:
MBizon Osis wrote:
Roime wrote:
MBizon Osis wrote:
What ever happens to the marauder class it will prolly be a mostly pve boat (due to price tag)


Like T3s, pirate ships and capitals?




The caps I can't say as I don't fly em, but the rest do a lot of pve and your point?


That pricetag doesn't make ships "mostly PVE", marauders aren't especially expensive compared to normal T3 fits, and nothing compared to pirate BS fits or caps.



Conceded the price alone has little to do with how a class is used. Thanks for missing the main point of my post Captian Oblivious.
Aglais
Ice-Storm
#3093 - 2013-09-07 15:39:19 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:

We wish to expand their use to PvP as well. Of course, their high price, low mobility will always ensure their role remains a niche one

What happened to this?
It would seem as this progresses people want there PVP role to be more and more predominant.


It seems so. But at the same time, Marauders being slow, plodding, extremely unagile and often completely stationary active tankers is not going to promote their presence in PvP at all.
Jake Warbird
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#3094 - 2013-09-07 15:44:26 UTC
If I could throw away 1bil for a pvp hull, marauders would be the last place I would do that.

Sugar Von MurdererTits : Jake Warbird gets my vote for most intriguing and attractive male character in Eve.
Mer88
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#3095 - 2013-09-07 15:54:10 UTC
Wolfgang Achari wrote:
Why not roll the web bonus into the Sebastian module, but make it a range bonus. This way you can give a rep bonus back to the marauders, but instead of doing rep amount bonus why not provide a 7.5% nanite usage bonus for AAR's and a 6% cap booster capacity bonus to ASB's? Keeping the 100% bonus in Sebastian mode. Combined with a proper T2 resist profile you give players a reason to still use normal reps, but give them a good advantage when using charged reps.

*Just thought I should add that this would give AAR's 11 cycles and ASB's 12 cycles.


most people dont use AAR or ASB for pve that bonus seems to specific forcing people to use such module for defence
Cade Windstalker
#3096 - 2013-09-07 15:54:36 UTC
Darrien wrote:
At first I thought the loss to active tanking would be bad, but then I ran some tests on a kronos and assuming that Marauders get HAC quality resists, omni tanking only takes a small hit (15-20dps) and generally tanking abillity is actually increased, the only real issue being taking pure damage on your weakest resists, ( which of course your should allow for in your tank anyway )


The problem is that the majority of mission damage is Kin/Therm which means the Golem and Kronos get a buff against most mission rats while the Vargur and Paladin only really get a buff against their racial enemy's mission rats and navy. Overall they would be better off with the local repair bonus than the resists or webs.

Gimme more Cynos wrote:
Sometimes I wonder how people can use CNR's, nightmares, machs and vindicators for lv 4's without those tank-bonuses.. Pirate


Generally they rely on lowering the incoming DPS before their tank fails through raw DPS and solid damage application.

Omnathious Deninard wrote:
The hilarious thing is that people who point out the pirate ship's tanks are really only emphasizing how bad these marauder proposals are. Tanks is the only thing Marauders have going for them and now that is getting nerfed on the base hulls. I mean, lets be serious, given this proposal who wants to actually trade their pirate BS for a Marauder?

I was thinking the same thing.

A few points that I thought of also, the T2 resists were done because some wanted better fleet application for a solo ship.
A pirate ship in an incursion fleet usually has a 2~4 slot tank and has no T2 resists at all.[/quote]

Funny thing about that, the Pirate Battleships actually have this weird and out-of-place 10% bonus to a racially associated armor resist. It makes no sense but it's been there for years.
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#3097 - 2013-09-07 16:41:05 UTC
Guys, the whole argument about tanking rats is moot.

A single rep domi can do it with a DC, EANMx2 and a RAH - by no means an optimal anti-rat resistance setup.

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".
Wolfgang Achari
Morior Invictus.
#3098 - 2013-09-07 16:49:17 UTC
Mer88 wrote:
Wolfgang Achari wrote:
Why not roll the web bonus into the Sebastian module, but make it a range bonus. This way you can give a rep bonus back to the marauders, but instead of doing rep amount bonus why not provide a 7.5% nanite usage bonus for AAR's and a 6% cap booster capacity bonus to ASB's? Keeping the 100% bonus in Sebastian mode. Combined with a proper T2 resist profile you give players a reason to still use normal reps, but give them a good advantage when using charged reps.

*Just thought I should add that this would give AAR's 11 cycles and ASB's 12 cycles.


most people dont use AAR or ASB for pve that bonus seems to specific forcing people to use such module for defence


With a proper T2 resist profile you can use normal reps more effectively than you can with the current rep amount bonus, because you're gaining an extra ~60% bonus in total resists. Giving a bonus to AAR's/ASB's gives players the option of having longer boosted reps. However, it doesn't make normal reps useless in PvP or PvE because you will still have the 60 second reload time to take into account. There's also the option to give a 5-7.5% bonus to reload time for boosted reps as well and it still wouldn't mean that using normal reps is a bad idea.
MBizon Osis
Doomheim
#3099 - 2013-09-07 16:50:15 UTC
Cade Windstalker what am I missing here? Base resists for a Paladin are in game EM50 EX40 KIN34.3 THR35 and the T2 resists are Armor resists: 50% EM / 80% EX / 62.5% KIN / 35% THERM. The T2 seam a lot better or the same in the case of thermal. What's everyones the beef with the t2 resists over the ingame resists? Saying they are weaker now? Just trying to keep up here. Are they talking the loss of the 7.5% rep bonus compaired to T2 resists? Or in bastion mode whatever? And why not have the T2resists and the rep 7.5% bonus when not in siege mode. Bastion have it's own tanking bonus for the ship stats.
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#3100 - 2013-09-07 16:58:22 UTC
marVLs wrote:
CanI haveyourstuff wrote:
Gimme more Cynos wrote:
Yes, the Torp-Golem is kinda crappy with these changes, but still - Javelins will reach excessive range for torps too.


there is no reason to use javelin torp over simple T2 cruise. Sadly.



That's why i would like to change Golem bonuses only for torps

At least 20% per level torps velo

It's really bad that to match even not enough range You must fit all rigs with velo rigs... Not even in bastion range will be satisfied...

Someone can say: so use cruise missiles. True, they're awesome right now, but torps need love, they're used only on bombers, and only because that's forced.

Maybe if CCP is planning to bring to us missile mods like tracking computers, then change TP bonus for that missile tracking computer thing bonus ;)


Golem 101: your range is determined by your fit and can't be changed on the fly.

Bonusing torpedoes for brawling means you won't be using cruises, so you just wasted every long range bonus, notoriously the MJD bonus.

My first suggestion was to bonus explosion radius -that would give a kick to Precision cruise missiles, which are going to be your primary anti-frig weapon anyways.

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you