Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Also

I wanted to add that the name may need to be changed as bastion would be specific to the Marauder.


One more thing to add.
The changes to TP cycle time is EPIC, however, since they're the least effective ewar out there, perhaps they should also have their optimal/falloff removed and instead be able to work at any range, as long as you can lock the target.
This sounds fair to me... Or at least give them a max range instead of optimal/falloff, and then give specific ships (like golem) a TP range bonus.

Thank you. I was in a hurry when I was writing that so I just tossed a couple of similar sounding bonuses together to get the idea across. I considered the on off suggestion for webs but if you want webs it's because you're brawling, and that doesn't mean not standing still just that you're in the thick of it. So, turning off webs while bastioned isn't really better, I suspect you REALLY want your webs while bastioned. So, while it solved the issue between loosing webs and having useless webs at range, it felt hacky and ungraceful without addressing the underlying issue of ship purpose. I thought about it some more and it really comes down to people wanting different ships.

My only qualm with my suggestion is that it's very tech 3'ish in the versatility. However, with only two or three modules to balance it wouldn't be that bad as you're picking one of three different bastion modules which is essentially picking one of three different ships, you can even make them like riggings if you want to prevent in combat versatility without a significant cost.

But, does this actually accomplish what CCP is trying to do? I'm still confused on this front as the current bonuses indicate they want a versatile ship while the original suggestion indicated they wanted a really focused ship. This actually allows both in an odd way. You get a REALLY focused ship but you have versatility in choosing that role. It's not as wishy-washy as proper Tech 3 ships, while (once you've chosen your module) it's easily as focused as any Tech 2 ship should be.

As long as CCP can pick a set of bonuses for each module that make sense (I.E. Tractor beams need to go out to 100km+ if you want them on the long range sniper platform) then this stands to fix a lot of issues in this thread.



Also, as an aside. Don't stomp on divergent gameplay that comes up in the thread unless you're stomping that play style from current ships as well. I really don't see why a ship that is much more risky to collapse wormholes with needs to have jumping removed while in bastion. If you don't like wormhole cycling then get rid of mass stability from wormholes, or use cargo plus base ship mass (which would fix the armor tanking issues anyway). If you don't want a marauder to jump while in bastion as it spoils the point of the weapon timers and intent of bastion then say that. Saying that you don't want it to play the same wormhole games that already happen with an orca and a interdictor is odd. You're risking a hell of a lot more with the Marauder than the interdictor and after fitting likely the Orca as well. So why shouldn't the marauder pilot be able to play those games as well?



Just some thoughts, hopefully useful;
_WAter_

The ASB was designed to give a burst repair for shields on ships that skirmish. It was in response to complaints that shield-skirmishing ships general had very low ehp and were at an unfair disadvantage in the face of medium range weaponry. I am talking about cruisers and battlecruisers here. It was given a 1-minute reload time in a deliberate measure to ensure that it was not used as a 'tank', but only as a 'battlefield repair' module.

Fitting two, with a large supply of cap boosters circumvents the burst limitation. A limitation that was deliberately designed in - so that the game did not become overly imbalanced.

Some ships can dual-fit ASBs to great effect - obviating shield boosters. This is wrong.
Shield marauders and some shield battleships can dual-fit ASBs to incredible effect, completely undermining and overwhelming all other active tank modules regardless of cost.

i.e. broken.

althogh its offtopic...
your obersvation is right but your conclusion may be wrong

your explanation snt the only (and probably not the simplest)
which would be there was an overproduction at release which hasnt corrected itself by now.

Snipping cause no one is reading

Standard Flight Mode

1) Balance the resistances on the Marauders
This would be unique to Marauders and would fit their role quite well.
Example
Golem - current
0% EM - 50% EX - 47.5% KI - 40% TH
Post Suggestion (roughly)
34 - 34 - 35 - 34
This would allow Marauders to build balanced tanks based off of these resists, giving them an ability that fits their description.

2) Balance the Hull around a brawler design.

I.E. - Their bonuses will be focused on damage application. Tracking/exp radius/velocity focused bonuses.
They would also be bonused towards MWD. At all skills lvl 5, with no mods, these ships would be able to track any battleship at any range, perfectly.

3) Weak sensors, but stronger than they are now.

4) Much better agility and mobility

5) Smaller mass

6) Shield/armor/structure are balanced somewhere in between current and proposed on this thread.

7) 6 highs instead of 7. If that slot needs to be given back to the ship, then it should be returned in either mid or low, depending on what CCP feels would be most balanced.

8) These ships would not be balanced towards utility, but would have that option due to spare slots.

9) No salvage/tractor bonus

10) Better scan res... possibly better than proposed in this thread

11) Would not have range bonuses at all.

This means the base hull of these ships would be designed specifically to be brawlers with balanced resists and propulsion bonuses.

These would be effective in PVE for those that like close range, high speed, and would be extremely effective in all forms of pvp.
They would also fit well in PVE fleets, even with long range weapons.

Bastion Module

IMPORTANT - My design idea behind the bastion module is that it would eventually be usable on many other ships, both being new ships, and existing ships and would have different effects on each ship.

1) The Bastion Module would not require a high slot, but instead, would have it's own slot much like subs on t3's

2) The bonuses for bastion mode would replace all the bonuses of the fitted ship

3) The bonuses for the bastion mode would be hull specific

4) Different sizes of bastion modules in the event they were ever designed for smaller ships I.E. small, medium, large

5) Bastion module would effect each possible ship differently

In the case of Marauders, they would be ANCHORED immediately. This also means that when you activate the module, you would be instantly anchored, reguardless of velocity. This would also keep CCP from having to worry about locking ships using this module because they wouldn't be able to warp, jump, use a WH, or move. So, they wouldn't have to increase the mass to avoid bumping, because this ship wouldn't move at all. (increasing mass means you could scan them down with no skill and one probe) PERHAPS TAKING DAMAGE IF AT TOO HIGH OF A VELOCITY

6) Bastion module being fitted reduces velocity and agility by X%

Now

Bastion Mode Marauder

As stated under Bastion module, all the bonuses change
Retains all base hull stats

1) Damage bonus either carries over, or drops/raises depending on what CCP would bonus the base hulls as.. Bastion, I would assume stays 100% damage.

2) When bastioned, gains a bonus towards tractor range. I would say comparable to that of the Noctis. (noctis would still stay on top due to 8 high slots)

3) Range bonuses

4) TP bonus in the case of the Golem, bonus to the effectiveness of tracking modules in the case of the turret boats, and bonuses towards sentry tracking in the case of the Kronos

5) Bastion module being fitted converts the Kronos into a sentry drone focused ship with all bonuses focused on sentries. (assuming a sentry boat would be preferred over a rail boat)

6) Tank boost buff while bastioned

7) Possibly a resist buff while bastioned

8) ewar immunity

9) A) MJD cycle bonus
B) Range bonus (150-200km range)
C) Able to select a range (anything 50km or more)

10) unable to receive remote assistance

11) (possible suggestion I read) - only bastion ships may assist each other
(my change to it) - with cap assistance and nothing else.


This would mean that you have a PVP boat that has pve potential with a role being specifically a brawler. It would be niche while being used in some pve situations.
However, the Bastioned mode would be a PVE focused boat with it's role being a tanky, sniper. It would be niche in pvp, but highly effective in certain situations such as breaking small roams, breaking small to med gate camps, and bait.

You would be required to commit, which is why I have proposed it being more like a sub system, so that once it's fitted, you're stuck in that role, instead of being able to simply online/offline a module, or simply swap a script.
No ship should have the capability of changing roles on a whim.

Alternately, those of you stating that the marauders need to be more versatile that t1, navy, or pirate didn't take a look when CCP stated the design plans of ships.
T2 ships are focused, t1 ships are versatile, navy are more focused than t1 and more versatile than t2, while pirate were designed to have the ultimate versatility with utility.(or something along that lines(was a long time ago))

I feel this is the best way to design marauders.

Now, with the Bastion module having a slot specifically for it, it would mean that other ships could be modified to allow a bastion module.

Black Ops BS's
Orca
Mining Barges/exhumers
Industrials
Noctis
Primus
Freighters

Basically, every ship would be different when fitting a bastion module.
I.E.
Hulk - range bonus at the cost of yield (reach a whole belt from warp in point)
Mack - Mine gas and take no damage at all, can't mine ore/ice.
Those are just some possible Bastion effects.

I agree with you about the general intent of the current system. It would make for a very bad model if moving up a class made you trump anything below you. That's not a game that would be particularly interesting to play. I'm more talking about the complete ineffectiveness of larger hulls to deal with ships that are down a class.

Unless the battleship fits cruiser size turrets in some of its highs its only option for dealing with small targets at close range is to deploy light/medium drones. The problem is that a flight of lights/mediums doesn't pack enough punch to break the tank of those targets. Unless you have utility highs and fit heavy neuts you don't have many options for escape either.

The role is reversed at range with the smaller ship risking getting blapped off the field just because it's at range. Not a fun prospect for the cruiser/frigate pilot too. What I'd like to see is the removal of those two extreme cases. The cruiser/frigates smaller size should offer some protection at range which decreases as it gets closer, while the BS wouldn't become completely ineffective against smaller targets at minimal range. No certain death for the cruiser/frigate pilot at range and no guaranteed lockdown for the BS in CQ. I think that would be more balanced and offer a more dynamic environment.

Note: As I mentioned earlier, with precision cruise and 3 TPs or 2 bonused TPs a missile ship can apply 75%+ damage to said targets at all ranges. I know this is what sets missiles apart from turrets.

Yes please..

Missile boats, are in need of faster missiles that apply damage better.

That right here is exactly how it should be..Easily makes them a whole lot better and fits the pvp/PVE role and even makes them good for incursions.

Solution, don't ******* give them t2 res.

No one seems to have cared about my suggestion.

This makes me a sad panda...