Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Oh I see. You think because they named a fleet after me it must be because I am a FC.

Wrong again.

I'm the guy actually testing these things.

The most disturbing problems with the Bastion are:

Absolute E-war immunity, ignores sandbox game mechanics.

Absolute RR/assistance lockout, ignores sandbox game mechanics.

Promotes halfwit play styles by ignoring mechanics and limiting choices.

Very few actually trained for a stationary bunker nor do I suspect they want one.

Bastion cycle makes it a piñata in PvP.

The active tanking bonuses it promotes are often negated by the forced immobility, active tanking was never a problem to begin with.

The ranges it promotes are negated by the immobility very quickly.

The hulls suffer nerfs making them less useful outside bastion than on live(currently this is true, could change).

But the most important of all...

Offers no additional fun/useful or engaging properties which follow the core design of Marauders being versatile and for long term deployment, a magical tractor them all module doesn't count either; These are only efforts to make things extremely easy and simple, not interesting in any way.

The more I think about it the more I dislike everything about it, I'm not saying I have the perfect solution, just that Bastion isn't even close.

click on his name >hide posts or something

also it seems that if you dced while in bastion your ship will not ewarp, so if you are not fast to log back in you are pretty much dead...

Because Marauders are all over low and nullsec now?

IF CCP wants them in PvP and these changes do nothing to encourage that, what exactly has changed?

Are the SiSi versions less effective than the current iterations?

They're different, assuredly, but effectiveness can be argued back and forth (ad nauseaum). Are they more vulnerable to ganking than current versions? Are they weaker? Are they slower isk makers?

I don't think so.

I am directly aiming my critique at the Bastion and what using it entails, moving away from the bastion as the center of the topic and saying that not using it is an alternative solution is missing the point and as it happens, not true.
Bastion will be mandatory, the mobility of Marauders among other things is already being nerfed, so choices are in fact being limited.
Anyone planning not to use the Bastion will find any faction/pirate ship will easily outperform Marauders; Marauders are deliberately being designed around the Bastion and you will have a hard time not using it because of the costs in the balancing.

Additionally, my gripe with the Bastion is not the idea that it isn't usable for at least something like gimmick PvP, it is that the module has severe flaws and it should be abolished as it currently is being presented, more so due to the fact it presents no actual interesting or fun mechanics to speak of when speaking of following the Marauder role.

Immunities:

Conditional immunities ignore the very idea of having established mechanics which exist have any effect on the results, which means you have balanced E-war for the whole game but then decide to circumvent this mechanic by a simple conditional rule which states, here the rules don't apply, effectively creating a second rule, every immunity is another rule and exception added to the first.

Would you support missiles which always applied full damage through a conditional and ignored signature radius/exp velocity? No you wouldn't, exact same thing, the proper way to do it is to follow mechanics in a relatively reasonable manner.

If in this case E-war is too powerful then rebalance it, revisit the mechanics and alter them to function as intended, just do not create new ways to avoid the problems.

E-war immunity ignores the sandbox mechanics for E-war, which is a use for sensor strength to determine efficiency, if there was a legit suggestion they would give Marauders a relatively high sensor strength in Bastion and not just outright cut them out from the sandbox in that specific area; Sandbox mechanics rely on the fact that they apply without selective interpretation causing meta rule sets, effectively destroying the whole concept in the process.



RR/assistance lockout ignores the idea of partaking in more complex parts of multiplayer gaming, it is a counterproductive limitation at best, promoting locked out solo play is out of touch with the whole concept of MMOs regardless of the fact if it is ignoring how RR works with mere conditionals.




Again, if you won't be using Bastion then you'll be better off in other ships by default, there is no choice between having the Bastion module or not, it is a choice between Bastion Marauder and Pirate Battleship, the live Marauders will no longer exist.

If you're even remotely interested in fluent mobility and kiting you will pick a Pirate Battleship.

The only choice you are getting with Bastion is, will I deploy here and die or win?

You are getting this one choice to substitute all the mobile intricacies of EVE combat, E-war threats and even quite simply the consequences of taking damage in many situations, successful tanking of damage becoming a guarantee rather than an active process of skill to manage a capacitor and avoid excess damage in multitudes of ways

The Ignoring of the whole concept of support in terms of remote assistance in situations where you should have need for it is one of the greatest flaws in Bastion design, when you are deployed.

It literally defines the idea of picking the worst of all possible scenarios into one module currently.


The Bastion undeniably promotes poor play styles, it throws every common sense defensive or offensive maneuver/adjustment out of the window and simplifies everything.

Soooo.... What about Dreads and Triage Carriers? Since it is so similar then all of this ranting and raving applies to them as well right? Are you in fact calling for Siege and Triage to be removed as well or is it ok because it's confined to low/null/WH? Does Dreads and Carriers Reduce the Sandboxieness of this game?

Sandbox is all about choice and choosing to use a Bastion Marauder is a valid choice in that context as is completely true to the game being Sandbox. Now weather the Basiton Marauser is OP and UP might indeed be very valid concerns and those should be brought to the attention of CCP after proper testing.

The only thing I DO agree with is theres no point in running the marauder without the bastion. I ran a Marauder because I could salvage and loot at the same time. I do not really do LP stuff so the loot and salvage has always been more important than running more missions faster without.

It's a CHOICE and this change makes that choice a lot more interesting with new pros and cons and hopefully new tools (traktor structure) to work with people's play styles. I do not begrudge people choosing Pirate BS.

Don't be afraid of the new or the change. That's what keeps eve alive.

They are quite a bit more tanky; On 1v1 engagement, they can outlast most battleship while shredding similar targets. But they're in no means solo pvp ships. Also, sisi pvp is not the same as TQ pvp. Can't tell honestly how they'd fare...

They have a somewhat smaller buffer tank, relying almost entirely on resists to tank, resists coming from Bastion.

In high-sec, they're not that vulnerable, with those resists, you could tank some ships until concord arrives. It would be dumb, thought to be out of bastion if getting ganked, unless you're already ready to warp.

I wouldn't say the Golem is better off. That web bonus is about as useful as screen doors on the bridge...


There, fixed it for you.