These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#4521 - 2013-10-01 08:10:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
McBorsk wrote:
Followed by a nerf threat to machariels. You sir, know how to upset people.

I was wondering when someone would comment on that...

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Debora Tsung
Perkone
Caldari State
#4522 - 2013-10-01 08:17:01 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Debora Tsung wrote:
Christyna Ishiyama wrote:
so whats the current state?

What's not to understand?
Current State is marauder iteration 1.


Maybe*.


Heh, that maybe true. o_O

But until I hear something else from CCP...

That said, I really want to test the Marauder iteration 1 because my Golem sneers at web bonuses.

Or somethinglike that... Straight

Stupidity should be a bannable offense.

Fighting back is more fun than not.

Sticky: AFK Cloaking Thread It's not pretty, but it's there.
Random Woman
Very Professional Corporation
#4523 - 2013-10-01 08:24:56 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Hey people,

We've been away from this thread for a while to let things cool down a bit.

With Rubicon coming to Singularity soon, we've decided to revert Marauders to the original design for now, as we want to see how they actually fare in practice within player hands before committing to the version 2 change.



Does that mean the mass increase in bastion mode is back too? Because that is the killer feature for me, it would make those completly useless ships rather nice for closing WHs.
DORNS LIGHT
Horde Armada
Pandemic Horde
#4524 - 2013-10-01 08:48:54 UTC
with the new looting module coming the same time has the marauder rebalance is the tractor beam range/velocity bonus not a complete waste. most pve players will use the looting module and most pvp players wont be fitting tractor beams. Roll
one question will the golem missile bonus go towards the new rapid launchers like the rest of the battleships?
Flashbang Thereal
S0utherN Comfort
#4525 - 2013-10-01 09:05:12 UTC
Im a little against the whole bastion ide. Dont know if this have been said befor since i have not had the time to look trough all the 200pages in this tread. Im pretty shure the bastion module wil be a disadvantage in a large pvp fight due to the no support of any kind thing. Picture your self 50 megas with logisupport. Against 50 maruders in bastion. So the bastion gives them boost to armor rep and ressist. But that wil not stop them from getting wolleyed off the field fast. But the megas with support wil be a much harder nut to crack and a cheaper alternative. 1v1 maruder wil most likely win 10outof10 times. But on and off bastion mode on a large battlefield wil render them in a state where they wil get to spread out after countless jumpdrive mistakes and bastionmode mistakes. Im not saying this is a shure thing. Just something to think about.
Shamus en Divalone
The Clandestine Forge
#4526 - 2013-10-01 09:08:56 UTC
I am currently within training range of either the Vargur or the Golem and can't decide which to go for, also I only see this ship as a long range weapons platform to cover other fleet members in a mission and clean up their mess behind them, oh and for popping structures with ease while tanking POS dps effortlessly Twisted
Christyna Ishiyama
Perkone
Caldari State
#4527 - 2013-10-01 09:23:55 UTC
Debora Tsung wrote:
Christyna Ishiyama wrote:
so whats the current state?

What's not to understand?

Current State is marauder iteration 1.


1st version: with rep bonus / bastion ressist bonus / without T2 ressist
2nd version: without rep bonus / without bastion ressist bonus / with T2 ressists / with webifier bonus

3rd (current version) is 1st version again or with rep bonus / bastion ressist bonus / with T2 ressists?

this is the only thing where I am not sure .... T2 ressists.... yes or no....

from counting and checking the other posts which appeared here I am assuming that T2 ressists are now out so they should maybe correct desctiption for hulls in first post because there are T2 ressist.
Kane Fenris
NWP
#4528 - 2013-10-01 09:33:55 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Hey people,

We've been away from this thread for a while to let things cool down a bit.

With Rubicon coming to Singularity soon, we've decided to revert Marauders to the original design for now, as we want to see how they actually fare in practice within player hands before committing to the version 2 change. We will let you know if and when we move to version 2 again. We’ll most likely open a new thread when they appear on Singularity as this one has become quite convoluted.

That means:


  • Shield, armor and hull resists in Bastion Mode only
  • Keep the 37.5% tank bonus on the Marauders, no web bonus


We are also aware this won't please everyone here - regarding their comparison with Pirate Battleships, especially the Machariel, please remember we have stated many times Pirate hulls were due for a rebalance, with Angel Cartel being on the front line for tuning changes.

Thanks for your time.



im glad that stupid web is gone .... rest not so much
Debora Tsung
Perkone
Caldari State
#4529 - 2013-10-01 09:35:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Debora Tsung
Christyna Ishiyama wrote:

1st version: with rep bonus / bastion ressist bonus / without T2 ressist
2nd version: without rep bonus / without bastion ressist bonus / with T2 ressists / with webifier bonus

3rd (current version) is 1st version again or with rep bonus / bastion ressist bonus / with T2 ressists?

this is the only thing where I am not sure .... T2 ressists.... yes or no....

from counting and checking the other posts which appeared here I am assuming that T2 ressists are now out so they should maybe correct desctiption for hulls in first post because there are T2 ressist.

There is no 3rd iteration.

Last update was a rollback to iteration 1.

Stupidity should be a bannable offense.

Fighting back is more fun than not.

Sticky: AFK Cloaking Thread It's not pretty, but it's there.
Christyna Ishiyama
Perkone
Caldari State
#4530 - 2013-10-01 09:59:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Christyna Ishiyama
Debora Tsung: version 3 was just my wish :-D

I just look forward to nice EHP even without bastion mod but this version isnt bad too :-D In bastion repair amount will be even better and without bastion it will be same and damage pattern will be better ...

and EHP is also question because Thermal and EM stays low so maybe when I am thinking about it ..... reverse back to option 1 is even better and give me better tank.

The only things which make me sad is that its much easier to fit much better shield tank than armor tank (but its another story and I am happy even with what I get)
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#4531 - 2013-10-01 10:19:16 UTC
Let me explain why all this marauder concept is faulty.


These are combat ships that are not ewar ships neither remote repair ships. THat means their role is to DEAL DAMAGE.


Dealing damage is their primary work, a work they do as well outside bastion mode as in bastion mode (the meager range extension is almost irrelevant). THere is no reason why I would prefer new marauders to old ones, because they do damage same way while the old ones are way faster .


Bastion mode without damage bonus is a waste of an idea. Who would use dreads if siege only gave them tank?


The only way a bastion module with range bonus would help is if ccp changed the horrifically short 249 km lock range limit. IF we could lock things at 300 km, then this extra range would mean something tactically. But even then would be a minor thing.



Give bastion a 25% damage bonus and the ship magically becomes something that makes sense.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Josilin du Guesclin
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#4532 - 2013-10-01 10:31:08 UTC
Sobaan Tali wrote:
What if we replaced the tractor beam range / pull speed bonus for something that each individual marauder might need...

Paladin
+ to tracking speed of Large Energy Turrets

Kronos
+ to web effectiveness
or
+ to range of webs

Golem
+ to range of torps (not cruises, just torps)
or
+ to explosion radius of torps (again for torps only)

Vargur
+ to velocity bonus of microwarp drives

Now, these bonuses might not be what each marauder is looking for, they are just example bonuses to help show what I mean by giving the EACH INDIVIDUAL Marauder a bonus that's useful for that hull. I've only flown the pally and golem, so those are what I would like to see for those hulls. What do you guys think? Is it usefull for PVP? Is it useful for PVE?


Firstly the tractor bonus is 'for free'. If it goes, it's very unlikely to be replaced with a DPS or tanking bonus. That being the case, it's a simple, flat-out, bonus having it there, and IMO it should stay. Not everyone is going to want to have to carry and drop some anchorable device, that then has to be picked up again. In fact, that's completely counter to the MJD bonus.

Secondly, Golems already have a torp (and cruise) range bonus. Are you asking for a double range bonus for the Golem? Such a thing would either be useless, or would lock the Golem into being a torp boat (why do you want that?). The Paladin should probably have a tracking bonus in place of the cap bonus.
Vulfen
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#4533 - 2013-10-01 10:32:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Vulfen
I have made a spread sheet of likely active tank fits with the bastion setup as it is now and as id like to see it.

Look at the 3rd Sheet

As you can see from the sheet, in the current setup CCP has, it is forcing you to use the bastion mod just to tank, admittedly the tank can be insane when your in it but outside of bastion it's poor

CCP needs to make sure these ships can be used effective both in and out of bastion without having to gimp them dps or over pimp the ship
Josilin du Guesclin
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#4534 - 2013-10-01 10:38:46 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:

Dealing damage is their primary work, a work they do as well outside bastion mode as in bastion mode (the meager range extension is almost irrelevant). THere is no reason why I would prefer new marauders to old ones, because they do damage same way while the old ones are way faster .

100km/60s = 1333 m/s. No, they are not slower than the current Tranq Marauders. They'll just move differently.
Lair Osen
#4535 - 2013-10-01 10:51:03 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Let me explain why all this marauder concept is faulty.


1 These are combat ships that are not ewar ships neither remote repair ships. THat means their role is to DEAL DAMAGE.


2 Dealing damage is their primary work, a work they do as well outside bastion mode as in bastion mode (the meager range extension is almost irrelevant). THere is no reason why I would prefer new marauders to old ones, because they do damage same way while the old ones are way faster .


3 Bastion mode without damage bonus is a waste of an idea. Who would use dreads if siege only gave them tank?


4 The only way a bastion module with range bonus would help is if ccp changed the horrifically short 249 km lock range limit. IF we could lock things at 300 km, then this extra range would mean something tactically. But even then would be a minor thing.



5 Give bastion a 25% damage bonus and the ship magically becomes something that makes sense.


1 ... ok

2 To perform their role ships must be able to tank the damage they receive. with a 185% increase in tank they will be able to do this much easier. The 25% range bonus will also be a bonus to damage application in snipe setups, or can compensate for immobility for short range fits. (paragraph is referring to PvE)

3 If siege didn't give them more dps they would probably have a role bonus to increase damage. in this case they would still be used as there is no other comparable (isk wise) options for outputting such large amounts of dps in one ship. what you probably meant was: why siege if it only bonuses tank?
In this case, as is the case with marauders atm, people who fly them in fleets will have to be careful in deciding when to siege/bastion, as when facing small groups that can be tanked it will be an advantage, but when facing larger groups it will be a disadvantage.

4 WTF do you want to do from 300km away????

5 While a 25% dps bonus would be nice, it is not necessary.
Cheng Chai
Another Corp..
#4536 - 2013-10-01 11:06:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Cheng Chai
Wow....
Version 2 created some ships that would be actually useful for something other than extremly risky c4 site running. They would have been good pvp ships for smaller groups with logisupport. They would have mixed up the extremly monotonious Incursion field.

Sad to see that they get nerfed into the ground again. I'm glad I haven't put the marauder skillbook into my Skllplan yet.

In version 1 they have a beasty local tank but thats about it. 1 neut ship will kill them and a 100km jump every 60sec wont safe you from tackle. For pve mostly useless due to mobillity issues. If the gate is 60km away you have no way to get there. Can't reach it with MJD, can't use bastion when MWDing.
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#4537 - 2013-10-01 11:12:07 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Hey people,

We've been away from this thread for a while to let things cool down a bit.

With Rubicon coming to Singularity soon, we've decided to revert Marauders to the original design for now, as we want to see how they actually fare in practice within player hands before committing to the version 2 change. We will let you know if and when we move to version 2 again. We’ll most likely open a new thread when they appear on Singularity as this one has become quite convoluted.

That means:


  • Shield, armor and hull resists in Bastion Mode only
  • Keep the 37.5% tank bonus on the Marauders, no web bonus


We are also aware this won't please everyone here - regarding their comparison with Pirate Battleships, especially the Machariel, please remember we have stated many times Pirate hulls were due for a rebalance, with Angel Cartel being on the front line for tuning changes.

Thanks for your time.



Aren't Pirate ships supposed to be better than T2? -does this means pirate ships including Machariel are due to a buff? Blink
Sry my bad English understanding, I might be confused with you guys ships type "plan"

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne
Vulfen
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#4538 - 2013-10-01 11:16:46 UTC
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:



Aren't Pirate ships supposed to be better than T2? -does this means pirate ships including Machariel are due to a buff? Blink
Sry my bad English understanding, I might be confused with you guys ships type "plan"


Yes pirate ships are supposed to be better than T2 however T2 ships each have a speciality, i.e the Hacs and AFs get reduced sig radiuses compared to pirate cruisers and the role bonus ontop, So this means if the mauraders are supposed to be the best at damage projection, the mach is currently the best ship for dmg projection and therefore is due a nerf, - personally though i dont want to see it nerfed
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#4539 - 2013-10-01 11:17:04 UTC
Cheng Chai wrote:
I'm glad I haven't put the marauder skillbook into my Skllplan yet.


From someone having it: no use but to save Damsel butt

Waiting to see final proposal to get an idea how interesting it might be to finish training this skill but for now only thing I see use for is still save Damsel butt and snipe POS modules, which is something that can be done by cheaper Battleships without having mo manage some extra module for giggles. RP dudes might like that thou, looks cool for them.

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#4540 - 2013-10-01 11:18:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Sergeant Acht Scultz
Vulfen wrote:
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:



Aren't Pirate ships supposed to be better than T2? -does this means pirate ships including Machariel are due to a buff? Blink
Sry my bad English understanding, I might be confused with you guys ships type "plan"


Yes pirate ships are supposed to be better than T2 however T2 ships each have a speciality, i.e the Hacs and AFs get reduced sig radiuses compared to pirate cruisers and the role bonus ontop, So this means if the mauraders are supposed to be the best at damage projection, the mach is currently the best ship for dmg projection and therefore is due a nerf, - personally though i dont want to see it nerfed



With +25% range given to Marauders Mach will no longer be the best at dmg projection, but I'm probably wrong.
Khronos with long range T2 and +25% range it's a hell of range for dmg application, you see what I mean?

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne