These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
#4621 - 2013-10-02 01:27:03 UTC
Grarr Dexx wrote:
hey, for my level 5s I actually need the MJD to get the **** away from the scorching damage, don't touch that **** yo

Pretty sure that's the only aspect of the rebalance that's remained consistent.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Lair Osen
#4622 - 2013-10-02 01:41:57 UTC
People say the ASB is OP, but the fact is it can only be used for a maximum of 45 seconds before needing 60 to reload. If you can take the damage for 60 seconds without using active reps, then you should be able to perma pulse tank with a normal booster anyway.
Using dual ASBs is the only way you can even get close to the the statistical tanking values of the ASB.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#4623 - 2013-10-02 02:46:03 UTC
Lair Osen wrote:
People say the ASB is OP, but the fact is it can only be used for a maximum of 45 seconds before needing 60 to reload. If you can take the damage for 60 seconds without using active reps, then you should be able to perma pulse tank with a normal booster anyway.
Using dual ASBs is the only way you can even get close to the the statistical tanking values of the ASB.


The reload time of ASBs and AARs is there specifically because they're so powerful and need some kind of draw back.
If CCP is fine with duel ASB, then so be it..
However, They need to have a draw back, but perhaps their drawback shouldn't be so big, so that we can reduce them to on per ship..

Perhaps 45 and 45...or maybe 45 and 30..
Something to make them not as easily countered, but not so powerful as to have two.
marVLs
#4624 - 2013-10-02 07:15:35 UTC
Maybe give them 3rd rig?

Because they don't have true T2 resists
Gabriel Karade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#4625 - 2013-10-02 07:28:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Gabriel Karade
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.
Really?.... I guess the level 4 crowd really do shout the loudest.

Ok, seen as the Golem keeps a damage application bonus to it's short range weapon system (i.e. painter bonus for torpedoes), give the Kronos back it's web bonus (for blasters) keep the falloff and optimal bonuses for the Vargur and Paladin.

That way you have two 'long range optimised' Marauders, and two 'close-in optimised' for brawling.

I think the biggest problem you had with Iteration II was the blanket approach rather than keeping things distinct.

War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
Mole Guy
Bob's Bait and Tackle
#4626 - 2013-10-02 07:53:27 UTC
i did some looking into the resistance numbers.

the original marauder t2 resistances were assigned when ccp didnt want to go overboard with t2 resistances (back in 07).

well, i added up the resistance on the paladin and averaged them. i came up with 56.875% as an average.

to me, after seeing how ships performed in space against a variety of targets, one niche thing we could do would be to just give them balanced resistance. like you did on the gnosis.

base 56.9% is pretty high, why dont we just give them a balanced 50% across the board? this would coincide with DCII AND bastion mode.
marauders would be setup to fight all enemies of the empire, not just minmatar, but they could hit blood raiders or whatever.

this would make incursion runners happy, worm hole guys happy and pretty much everyone when your ship can omni tank really well and there are no needs for specific flavored rigs.
2 EANP II's and we have a great balanced tank. DC II, bastion and it would be 75 or so across the board.

just a thought.
marVLs
#4627 - 2013-10-02 08:15:13 UTC
With rubicon tractor structure change tractor bonus to something else.

Remove 8th high slot.
Give Paladin and Kronos 5th med slot, Golem 5th low slot, vargur 6th low slot
Vulfen
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#4628 - 2013-10-02 08:39:17 UTC
Again i insist that tech 2 resistances are better, CCP should put the T2 resists and the 37.5% rep bonus on these ships
It wont OP them, most ships only gain slightly from them, the biggest gainer is the Golem, as it can fit a 2 slot midslot and 1 DC tank. Freeing up an extra mid for it's TP
See spreadsheet for details on tank levels
Now with Overheat calculations and another iteration of bonuses

Also i makes all the ships effective PVP and PVE boats, if we stick with the current iteration people will not use them in pvp as it is too easy to kill one no in bastion with a normal fleet, due to low resists, and easy to kill buffer fit ones in bastion as they have 1 minute of no RR assistance and on a ship with only about 400k EHP thats more than enough time to kill it.

Also being stuck at 0m/s just opens you up to being shot by anything. a minute in eve is about long enough to light cyno, jump dread - siege - lock - fire 2-3 volley. Yay easy 1-2bill kill. And lets mention that when the weapon timer kicks in it has another 30secs after coming out of bastion before it can jump. #deadinthewater
Cassius Invictus
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#4629 - 2013-10-02 08:40:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Cassius Invictus
Mole Guy wrote:
i did some looking into the resistance numbers.

the original marauder t2 resistances were assigned when ccp didnt want to go overboard with t2 resistances (back in 07).

well, i added up the resistance on the paladin and averaged them. i came up with 56.875% as an average.

to me, after seeing how ships performed in space against a variety of targets, one niche thing we could do would be to just give them balanced resistance. like you did on the gnosis.

base 56.9% is pretty high, why dont we just give them a balanced 50% across the board? this would coincide with DCII AND bastion mode.
marauders would be setup to fight all enemies of the empire, not just minmatar, but they could hit blood raiders or whatever.

this would make incursion runners happy, worm hole guys happy and pretty much everyone when your ship can omni tank really well and there are no needs for specific flavored rigs.
2 EANP II's and we have a great balanced tank. DC II, bastion and it would be 75 or so across the board.

just a thought.


Many people bofoere you (including me Big smile) have said that, but CCP ignored that...

What they shoud do is keep the maruders as for mk1 version AND introduce another ship (hull) that would use marauder skill and would be good at PvP, Incursions etc.
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#4630 - 2013-10-02 09:14:24 UTC
@ CCP, after playing with a few fits on eft, i really think that the proposed changes will be fine PROVIDED you add an additions low/mid slot to them.

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Chance Harper
Doomheim
#4631 - 2013-10-02 09:48:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Chance Harper
most changes look fine for me but there are 2 things that bother me.

1. Reduced speed.. bad idea i really dont need a MJD in missions.
2. reduced Drone bandwith/bay

Marauders were meant as mission running BS. Reducing Drones will make running missions a pain in the a** killing off all the lil pesky frigs and drones with the big guns. Reaching gates to get to the next pocket needs max speed and not MJD, in most missions gates arent that far away that i would need a MJD.

1 Buff i would like to see is to give them more sensor strength, how can it be that a technicaly more advanced ship has worse sensor than its standard counter part? A Raven has a higher sensor strength than a Golem. In missions you get jammed like crazy and there isnt really a way to counter it, not even with modules that are meant to counter it.

But then again, since i play somerblink, mission running became pointless. I make more isk on somerblink in 1hr than running missions for 2 days.
DSpite Culhach
#4632 - 2013-10-02 10:14:18 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
MuntadaralZaidi wrote:
I threw out 25km increments for a reason. Lots of acceleration gates are in the ~25km range so a 25km MJ would be of use if you entered room, parked in bastion and shot it, then wanted to get near gate without cracking open trig book (assuming CCP listens to those who play the game for fun, not to relive boring high school trig classes).

I'm not trying to say you're lazy, but you're lazy. Lol


If the stupid gates were solid we could just MJD straight into them and stop and give them a nasty dent to remind them not to mess with Marauders.

I apparently have no idea what I'm doing.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#4633 - 2013-10-02 10:16:07 UTC
Current amarauders proposal is effectively weaker than the ones in TQ. THe speed/signature they are loosing is WAY more relevant than a button thnat makes you a fat static target that can be ignored until later int he fight because you are not going anywhere.. while at same time not being any more dangeorus than you were when you could still move.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#4634 - 2013-10-02 10:20:41 UTC
Gabriel Karade wrote:
Really?.... I guess the level 4 crowd really do shout the loudest.

Ok, seen as the Golem keeps a damage application bonus to it's short range weapon system (i.e. painter bonus for torpedoes), give the Kronos back it's web bonus (for blasters) keep the falloff and optimal bonuses for the Vargur and Paladin.

That way you have two 'long range optimised' Marauders, and two 'close-in optimised' for brawling.

I think the biggest problem you had with Iteration II was the blanket approach rather than keeping things distinct.


A web bonus on a ship that sits still is near useless to me.
Debora Tsung
Perkone
Caldari State
#4635 - 2013-10-02 10:30:57 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Current amarauders proposal is effectively weaker than the ones in TQ. THe speed/signature they are loosing is WAY more relevant than a button thnat makes you a fat static target that can be ignored until later int he fight because you are not going anywhere.. while at same time not being any more dangeorus than you were when you could still move.


Only that static button frees up so many mid slots you can afford to cram some more propulsion or even additional webifiers in that thing. Straight

Really I don't get your problem, all that whining looks like "waaah Igaddachangemahsetap!" to me. Straight

No offense, but after 230 pages of crying it's really hard to read something different into your post.

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.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#4636 - 2013-10-02 10:31:40 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Gabriel Karade wrote:
Really?.... I guess the level 4 crowd really do shout the loudest.

Ok, seen as the Golem keeps a damage application bonus to it's short range weapon system (i.e. painter bonus for torpedoes), give the Kronos back it's web bonus (for blasters) keep the falloff and optimal bonuses for the Vargur and Paladin.

That way you have two 'long range optimised' Marauders, and two 'close-in optimised' for brawling.

I think the biggest problem you had with Iteration II was the blanket approach rather than keeping things distinct.


A web bonus on a ship that sits still is near useless to me.



A web STRENGHT bonus yes. but if was a web RANGE bonus...

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Debora Tsung
Perkone
Caldari State
#4637 - 2013-10-02 10:38:16 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

A web bonus on a ship that sits still is near useless to me.


web STRENGHT bonus yes. but if was a web RANGE bonus...

That might be nice too, but I bet there'd be someone crying about that in about 0.5 seconds after CCP anounced a change like that.

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.
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#4638 - 2013-10-02 10:42:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Rek Seven
Yeah giving marauders a web range brawlers would enable them to play the role of a sniper AND a brawler.

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Gabriel Karade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#4639 - 2013-10-02 10:46:54 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Gabriel Karade wrote:
Really?.... I guess the level 4 crowd really do shout the loudest.

Ok, seen as the Golem keeps a damage application bonus to it's short range weapon system (i.e. painter bonus for torpedoes), give the Kronos back it's web bonus (for blasters) keep the falloff and optimal bonuses for the Vargur and Paladin.

That way you have two 'long range optimised' Marauders, and two 'close-in optimised' for brawling.

I think the biggest problem you had with Iteration II was the blanket approach rather than keeping things distinct.


A web bonus on a ship that sits still is near useless to me.
If you're sitting still it's even more reason to have a web strength bonus, given you cannot move to reduce transversal of orbiting targets...

War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#4640 - 2013-10-02 10:49:23 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:
Ager Agemo wrote:
so a dominix is still better than any marauder for making isk, and for fleets? why is it so hard to just turn marauders into marauders and make them oversized HACs?

bastion is a death sentence in fleets, no one is going to use them on true fleets.


That's the point though.

They're intended to be solo ships, which makes them niche in pvp.

If you want a fleet ship, get a different ship


For solo pvp, that 7.5% web would've been quite essential.