These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#3801 - 2013-09-18 03:16:43 UTC  |  Edited by: James Amril-Kesh
I wouldn't get too hung up on the way things look now, because frankly right now they look awful.

Not too enthusiastic about having both the 30% resist bonus removed from bastion and the repair module bonus removed from the ships. I really doubt giving them full T2 resists makes up for that. I'm also not happy with that latter bonus being replaced by a web strength bonus. I think the web strength is fairly useless for this ship in its intended role. It smacks right up against the MJD and the damage application bonuses.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#3802 - 2013-09-18 05:55:46 UTC
I patiently await a dev update.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
To mare
Advanced Technology
#3803 - 2013-09-18 06:14:26 UTC
marauder skill bonus -20% to stacking penalty factor

that would be lovely
Cassius Invictus
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#3804 - 2013-09-18 06:49:37 UTC
Ok just figured. At some point T3 will be nerfed (and they should be) but the problem is that this would leave us WH guys with no ships to run anomalies. Marauders could easily take that role. So when proposing anything new for marauders pls try balance it out against future T3 rebalance. Oh and no rr for class 5 anomaly is a no no...
Aimee Maken
Atasaki Holdings
#3805 - 2013-09-18 06:58:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Aimee Maken
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Aimee Maken wrote:
My biggest thing is that this is the most advanced boat in eve in terms of training time needed for a sub cap. And you guys are trying to harmonize them all with the same stick, regardless of the unique weapon system and racial plays they have.
What I purpose is to have the goal of the marauders to be “Showing the best the race has to offer, and to shore up any weakness in that method”


No hull should be the "absolute best" nor should it "shore up any weaknesses" in a hull. Every hull and racial choice should have some give and take.

Overall I find all four of your concepts ridiculously over-powered. Plus I find the whole idea of a moving while deployed battleship to be just a little ridiculous and unappealing.

Plus if you want to talk about training time, Black Ops Battleships are actually worse in terms of overall training time, recommended certificates, and they force you to train a set of very specialized skills where as the prerequisites for Marauders all fall under core ship skills.


The shore up the weakness bit is only really considered when you add in the low scan res of the ship, it should never be used in pvp because of that fact and if you do, you need a lot of SEBOs and other support just because of the lumbering nature of the battleships.

For a high end pve ship, this would mean they are balanced around the pirate ships, rather than nerfing the pirates down to their level.

I personally envision the pirate ships to be like T2 ships but with a focus pvp capabilities and balance, their costs should be raised and they should not suffer from the scan res issue of the marauders. So then pirates would have better pvp, okay pve, and cost a ton (1.5-2.5 bil range). While Marauders would have excellent pve, **** pvp (SS), and cost slightly less while have a far larger skill train time.

On blops, I hope they rework the entire line. I wish for anti super use bomber, along with a super change that comps the current pilots as their nigh invincibility turns into just another tier of ship as per tiercide.

Again tho, the thing that you should take away is that they should make each marauder feel unique, and not have the class harmonized like some other T2 lines. They should feel racially matched, if not have the weakness compensated.
Alxea
Unstable Pirate Sharks Of The Damed Sea
#3806 - 2013-09-18 06:59:27 UTC
I don't like things getting away from me so I don't like my web bonus being nerfed. Guess I'll just use 2 webs instead of one on my kronos now. >_> Everything else looks good. Make it like a mini dread. Perfect for gate camping and station camping.
Isinero
Perkone
Caldari State
#3807 - 2013-09-18 09:36:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Isinero
If I am counting well it will means that I will be able to be cap stable with large repairer and only 2 cap rechargers without any issues and I will have still something to spare :-)

Not sure if I am counting it well but bonus to cap recharge seems to be aproximately 33% for paladin. (did someone try to count it ?)

it would be amazing because I will be able to fit jump drive and something else and with just 4 mid slots I am really happy that there is also boost to cap recharger.
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#3808 - 2013-09-18 09:39:23 UTC
I can't believe that there are actually people bad enough to think these things won't be ridiculously overpowered..

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#3809 - 2013-09-18 10:23:04 UTC
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
I can't believe that there are actually people bad enough to think these things won't be ridiculously overpowered..


*pssst, silence*
Isinero
Perkone
Caldari State
#3810 - 2013-09-18 10:56:19 UTC
I even count it and it will be "cheap" to have it nice ... so let it be ..... dont touch it :-D I like it :-))

I tried to count what suicide gank needs to do to kill me :-D and if nothing else :-D It is not worth to kill me... thats what I like :-D

1000 dps / nice range / 600 tank (1200 tank in bastion) / mjd :-D for something around 2 billions (500 milion drop in average and cost to shot me down is paroximately 350 - 700 millions based on sector :-D)

I really hope that it will stay like this ... it needs huge amount of training compared to other ships so it will be nice if it will be at least little bit better.
Xequecal
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#3811 - 2013-09-18 11:32:40 UTC
Aimee Maken wrote:
The shore up the weakness bit is only really considered when you add in the low scan res of the ship, it should never be used in pvp because of that fact and if you do, you need a lot of SEBOs and other support just because of the lumbering nature of the battleships.


...? These ships don't have low scan resolutions, they all have above average scan res for battleships.
Apo Lamperouge
#3812 - 2013-09-18 11:52:42 UTC
I'm not sure why there is talk of Marauders being "Short Range Weapons" specialists. I prefer to have Tachy's on my Paladin, combined with the Micro Jump Drive. I'm working the Gallente Epic Arc right now, and the 'heavy dps" missions are very easily managed by a short hop of 100 km and BLAP with Imperial Navy Ultra-violets at 80 kms (and before you ask, yes, I get volleys of 2300-5500 at that range with them, consistently when they get into IN Gamma range...they never make it to Gleam, trust me)

Please do not force me to be choosing one gun type like some Pirate Battleships (Vindicator I'm talking about you. Nightmare you CAN put pulses on...but why?). Let's face it; the Marauder is a PVE ship. It's role is specialized in that. What moron brings tractor beams and a salvage unit to a fleet fight (on a battleship)? Come on, leave it a PVE ship. Fix blops as PVP if you need to do that.

This thread is getting completely out of hand... 191 pages? Who knew that it would be so controversial? A tech 2 ship should be specialized, not watered down to being a "little bit of this, a little bit of that".

Frankly, I'm getting a little worried that this "rebalance" is going to screw them up totally. So Marauders are a little OP for PVE..so what? They suck donkey balls in pvp. I would never think of bringing one into pvp, the ease of which you get your ass handed to you by any ewar is re-donkulous. I have "a lot" of isk, and a lot of skill time invested in my Paladin. If I want to pvp in a battleship, I will use blops or a navy faction battleship if i want to spend money. HAC's or T1 battleships if I don't. There's a reason that all the Fleet Doctrine I've seen is T1 or Navy battleships.

Here's a thought... want to get rid of OP stuff? Just eliminate Faction, Deadspace and Officer modules. Force everyone to use T2 only. That will level the playing field.

That BTW was a joke.

So just stop, you're making a mistake.

Poaster's Disclaimer; this is my opinion only. Remember opinions are like assholes, everyone has one, and it generally stinks.



Sometimes a knife right through your heart is exactly what you need.
Apo Lamperouge
#3813 - 2013-09-18 11:54:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Apo Lamperouge
Xequecal wrote:
Aimee Maken wrote:
The shore up the weakness bit is only really considered when you add in the low scan res of the ship, it should never be used in pvp because of that fact and if you do, you need a lot of SEBOs and other support just because of the lumbering nature of the battleships.


...? These ships don't have low scan resolutions, they all have above average scan res for battleships.


It's their sensor strength that is crap. It's like the sensors are being run by a potted plant.

Sometimes a knife right through your heart is exactly what you need.
Nova Satar
Pator Tech School
#3814 - 2013-09-18 12:29:49 UTC
just to confirm, once you've entered bastion mode, is that the part where 3 nados suicide gank you?
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#3815 - 2013-09-18 12:30:32 UTC
Apo Lamperouge wrote:

Please do not force me to be choosing one gun type like some Pirate Battleships (Vindicator I'm talking about you. Nightmare you CAN put pulses on...but why?). Let's face it; the Marauder is a PVE ship. It's role is specialized in that. What moron brings tractor beams and a salvage unit to a fleet fight (on a battleship)? Come on, leave it a PVE ship. Fix blops as PVP if you need to do that.


I have the feeling you judge those ships from a pure pve-pov. Yeah, railvindis and tachnightmares are a *thing* in incursions or anomalies, yet they were flown a lot with various fittings. Same potentially for the most pvp-prominent marauder, the kronos. Though they are fitted sometimes rails, sometimes blasters for pve, they are near always fitted for blasters+webs+buffer to serve as a dirtcheap substitute for Vindiwebs.

The giant thing you apparently overlooked was the very generous fittings buff, which allowst them to fit a rack of heavy utility mods, i.E. pvp.

Apo Lamperouge wrote:

Frankly, I'm getting a little worried that this "rebalance" is going to screw them up totally. So Marauders are a little OP for PVE..so what? They suck donkey balls in pvp. I would never think of bringing one into pvp, the ease of which you get your ass handed to you by any ewar is re-donkulous. I have "a lot" of isk, and a lot of skill time invested in my Paladin. If I want to pvp in a battleship, I will use blops or a navy faction battleship if i want to spend money. HAC's or T1 battleships if I don't. There's a reason that all the Fleet Doctrine I've seen is T1 or Navy battleships.


Most fleet doctrines are based on t1/navy cause every scrub can fly those, and they are cheap within limits. Unlike most smallscale engagements, dumping boatloads of ISK to get a few extrapercent performance isn't worth it when you're one of 200 f1-lemmings.

The complete ewar-problematic is mostly abolished by the introduction of the bastion-module. Being unable to receive RR luckily also disqualifies it for fleet usage. If you're just looking at the raw hull without the bastionmodule, you get a battleship with t2 resists and 4 extrahighs over other battleships, while suffering from (as of now) only low sensor strength.

I really do not understand how those are bound exclusively to pve. They have been in the past with their craptastic fittings and lack of HP or RR-efficiency, but apparently they are going to change that finally.
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#3816 - 2013-09-18 12:31:29 UTC
Nova Satar wrote:
just to confirm, once you've entered bastion mode, is that the part where 3 nados suicide gank you?


More like 8+
Xequecal
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#3817 - 2013-09-18 12:35:22 UTC
Why would they waste 6+ attack BCs to suicide gank your marauder? The ship might be worth 1bil but that doesn't drop when you explode. If you don't put billions in deadspace **** on it nobody will bother.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#3818 - 2013-09-18 12:56:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Joe Risalo
Joe Risalo wrote:


Ya know, I had an idea once that might just be crazy enough to work.

When in bastion mode you unlock 3 turret/launcher hard points specifically for small weapons.
Bastion would give a damage and tracking bonus to those small weapons.

Some people might think this is OP, but look at it closely.

Small ships die at short range, large ships die at med/long range.
How do you take one down?

Easy, get small ships out at long range orbiting out of traversal, get big ships under it tanking the small guns and out traversing the large guns.

This would change things up a bit and the big ships would have to play tackle.
This would also mean that there major weakness would be heavy brawlers, with good agility.



I got two likes on the quoted posts, but people really need to realize that liking a comment doesn't keep it as part of the conversation...
Sure, like a comment, but if you like it, you need to be talking about it, even if it's just saying "hey, i like this".
It's enough to keep it as part of the conversation.

Edit:
Also, what I mean by "unlock" is the turrets are offlined until you go into bastion mode.
If you're one of those that wants your utility for salvage, well, you have to give up something for utility.
In this case it would be these small turrets/launchers.
However, when bastioned I think you should have the same bonuses as a noctis.
This won't obsolete the noctis, as many people like myself feel that the noctis is still way faster if you like to salvage and loot entire rooms.
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#3819 - 2013-09-18 13:14:48 UTC
Houm, original announcement was on august 29th. Then it was nerfed on September 4th, just one week later.

Today it's september 18th and we still don't know what do they intend to do nor what is going on. Are they testing any of the player suggestions? Are they working on something else? Has the 2n iteration been approved and to hell with player feedback (that would be so much CCP...)?

Some feedback would be nice, if even just a "we're looking into it, please be patient guys". What?

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you
Jasper Blanch
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#3820 - 2013-09-18 13:20:04 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:
Joe Risalo wrote:


Ya know, I had an idea once that might just be crazy enough to work.

When in bastion mode you unlock 3 turret/launcher hard points specifically for small weapons.
Bastion would give a damage and tracking bonus to those small weapons.

Some people might think this is OP, but look at it closely.

Small ships die at short range, large ships die at med/long range.
How do you take one down?

Easy, get small ships out at long range orbiting out of traversal, get big ships under it tanking the small guns and out traversing the large guns.

This would change things up a bit and the big ships would have to play tackle.
This would also mean that there major weakness would be heavy brawlers, with good agility.



I got two likes on the quoted posts, but people really need to realize that liking a comment doesn't keep it as part of the conversation...
Sure, like a comment, but if you like it, you need to be talking about it, even if it's just saying "hey, i like this".
It's enough to keep it as part of the conversation.

Edit:
Also, what I mean by "unlock" is the turrets are offlined until you go into bastion mode.
If you're one of those that wants your utility for salvage, well, you have to give up something for utility.
In this case it would be these small turrets/launchers.
However, when bastioned I think you should have the same bonuses as a noctis.
This won't obsolete the noctis, as many people like myself feel that the noctis is still way faster if you like to salvage and loot entire rooms.


How do you propose to differentiate between 'small turret hardpoints' and 'large turret hardpoints'? to the best of my knowledge, there isn't nor should there be a mechanic to differentiate here. This just invites somebody to stack 7 large weapons on their marauder.