These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Henry Montclaire
Guild of Independent Pilots
DammFam
#881 - 2013-08-30 19:23:04 UTC
This looks really interesting. I think I'll start training towards a Marauder now!
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#882 - 2013-08-30 19:24:34 UTC

The next invasion of Delve is gonna sound like this.
Bacchanalian
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#883 - 2013-08-30 19:25:14 UTC
These look gimmicky, and don't appear to add much inherent value to a fleet comp that no one would currently engage anyway. Besides with blap dreads, which this fleet would provide a field day for. Kill three of em and you've won the isk war even if you lose a dread. And to kill three of them you simply have to cycle your guns three times (maybe 6 if they're buffered).
Lipbite
Express Hauler
#884 - 2013-08-30 19:26:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Lipbite
Notice how two most "liked" comments in this thread are (approximately) "worst idea ever".

Please, add script for damage boost instead of standard tracking / range - so bastion module won't be useless in incursions (structures shooting).

And replace new skill with standard tactical weapon reconfiguration (to make transition from BS to dreads easier).

Also local repair bonus does not scale during fleet encounters. Could be great to replace all local repair bonuses with "received healing" bonus (for command ships too).
Jaz Antollare
UrAnus Probing Squad
#885 - 2013-08-30 19:29:52 UTC
Give marauders some sensor strength, +5 maybe. and increase the tractor bonus! Other than that it looks really great!

Btw the safety control must be in yellow or in red? (I think the yellow would be just fine)
Admiral EnderWiggin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#886 - 2013-08-30 19:29:58 UTC
I wouldn't risk a marauder in incursion with the way bastion is designed now. Unless I could easily solo tank. Which would be kinda OP. Please review the concept.
Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
#887 - 2013-08-30 19:30:16 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Just another quick update.


  • We are removing the BASTION TRANSFORMERTHINGIE™ SKILL, as the name was just too awesome to be released to the public (ok ok, more seriously we got the point: having to train a new rank 8 skill just for this module wasn't appealing). Instead, the bastion mode will use high energy physics 4 and energy grid upgrades 5. The former is rank 5, the later you already need to fly the class. The bastion mode cycle time will be reduced to 60s by default to compensate.

  • We hear you regarding having to drop the safeties to use the bastion mode in high-sec - we're going to fix it so you don't have to drop them to use the module. However you'll still receive a weapon timer when activating it.


Adjusting OP to reflect this.

EDIT: remember all of this is subject to change - training high energy physics is at your own risk if the bastion mode skill requirements change.


I'd prefer a new skill over a carebear industry skill tbh.


Multitasking at 5 would be nice.

Meet the Mario Kart 8 - Capsuleer Club Cup
Tzel Mayon
State War Academy
Caldari State
#888 - 2013-08-30 19:33:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Tzel Mayon
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Joining the call for the Bastion Module to use Tactical Weapons Reconfig, like Siege Modules.
I'm sure that your coders are capable of dealing with the small aspect of the fuel reduction on the skill not messing things up easily in the next four months. It creates a good flow through for ships which have similar functions.
Much like Covert Ops have the same sub skills needed for function as recons do. And EAF need to train the same EWar skills. They don't suddenly change EWar skills simply because you have gone up a ship size.

Also the low base sensor strength still needs a look at. EWar immunity is all fine & dandy when deployed, but they should have at least T1 BS strength on their sensors to allow for any kind of mobility. Otherwise the MJD bonus part is utterly useless since any time not deployed you can't do anything.


To be honest, "Tactical Weapon Reconfiguration" should be renamed to "Siege Operations" ... Or something like that.

An /actual/ Tactical Weapon Reconfiguration that allowed you to, oh say ... "Tactically reconfigure your weapons," (not just your hull), would be awesome.

Perhaps something that affected ammo reload times and crystal damage, or going as far as to let you reconfigure your current weapons to enter a different mode, (perhaps high power modules that allow you to temporarily add more range/tracking at the expense of heat damage, or something.)

There are a lot of Misnomers in Eve.

I don't want to perpetuate the problem by having "Tactical Weapon Reconfiguration" apply to something that is actually "Tactical Hull Reconfiguration." or "Siege Operations".
luredivino
Infinite Point
Pandemic Horde
#889 - 2013-08-30 19:40:05 UTC
A reduction in the effectiveness of energy neutralizers would be another useful bonus. Would make it so these things could run level 5s or certain complexes without getting drained to 0 instantly.
Karsa Egivand
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#890 - 2013-08-30 19:42:13 UTC
Props for going the tough road.

It'll be a nightmare to balance (I won't comment on the details, I am not qualified.), so this surely looks like the first class to have a look at again Winter 1.1 and thereafter...

I DO like the idea, especially the bridge between sup-cap and capital operations
Gorn Arming
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#891 - 2013-08-30 19:45:47 UTC
These changes make very little sense.

The inability to receive remote reps while sieged means that these ships will see no use in large fleets. That hardly seems necessary on a ship that's already bonused towards active tanking with only a moderate 30% resist bonus applying towards remote reps.

Further, because this module anchors the Marauder in place for its duration, it's going to be incredibly risky (meaning not cost-effective) to use one of these in nullsec or lowsec PvE.

These Marauders seem to provide yet another reason for everyone to move their money-making characters to highsec. Is that really what we want?
Hikaru Kuroda
Extheria
#892 - 2013-08-30 19:46:05 UTC
I don't really know what to think.

Seems a bit radical change for me... Let's see how they perform on test server.
nahjustwarpin
SUPER DUPER SPACE TRUCKS
#893 - 2013-08-30 19:46:29 UTC
Please remember that instead of Siege module it has more to do with Triage module, Siege increases dps (drastically),
It improves tank, but there isn't much problem in tanking with marauders anyway, and in pvp iyou'll be a sitting duck that needs to be alphaed with tornados.
Bastion doesn't, it only slightly increases range. but with less drones you will do less dps than with old marauder, and you'll lose web bonus which reduces your dps at short range.
unimatrix0030
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#894 - 2013-08-30 19:47:46 UTC
Can you still jump a wormhole while in bastion mode?

No local in null sec would fix everything!
Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
#895 - 2013-08-30 19:52:27 UTC
Gorn Arming wrote:
These changes make very little sense.

The inability to receive remote reps while sieged means that these ships will see no use in large fleets. That hardly seems necessary on a ship that's already bonused towards active tanking with only a moderate 30% resist bonus applying towards remote reps.

Further, because this module anchors the Marauder in place for its duration, it's going to be incredibly risky (meaning not cost-effective) to use one of these in nullsec or lowsec PvE.

These Marauders seem to provide yet another reason for everyone to move their money-making characters to highsec. Is that really what we want?


I dunno if your view isnt to fleet fight centered? The changes arent meant to be for big fleet fights its still a Highend PvE Ship and they clearly stated this in the OP.

Its a welcome change after 6 years of ignoring Marauders because Pirate Ships where simply better...

Meet the Mario Kart 8 - Capsuleer Club Cup
Unsuccessful At Everything
The Troll Bridge
#896 - 2013-08-30 19:54:56 UTC
Cant respond to this thread now...all blood rushing to pants area....

Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?
Auferre
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#897 - 2013-08-30 19:57:07 UTC
Crazy idea. Completely nuts. Big smile

I'm going to need a macro that plays the Transformers theme song when I activate bastion mode.
Gorn Arming
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#898 - 2013-08-30 20:02:33 UTC
Lephia DeGrande wrote:
Gorn Arming wrote:
These changes make very little sense.

The inability to receive remote reps while sieged means that these ships will see no use in large fleets. That hardly seems necessary on a ship that's already bonused towards active tanking with only a moderate 30% resist bonus applying towards remote reps.

Further, because this module anchors the Marauder in place for its duration, it's going to be incredibly risky (meaning not cost-effective) to use one of these in nullsec or lowsec PvE.

These Marauders seem to provide yet another reason for everyone to move their money-making characters to highsec. Is that really what we want?


I dunno if your view isnt to fleet fight centered? The changes arent meant to be for big fleet fights its still a Highend PvE Ship and they clearly stated this in the OP.

Its a welcome change after 6 years of ignoring Marauders because Pirate Ships where simply better...

Fine--we'll rule them out of fleets entirely.

Why give a "high-end PvE ship" a module that will only be used in highsec PvE? Sieging your battleship in a nullsec anom will get you killed sooner or later (my bet's on sooner); doing it in highsec is nearly risk-free.

The addition of tackling rats to forsaken hubs in the last update was enough to make most Goons back off from Vindicators for nullsec PvE, and the amount of time you spend while tackled by rats in a Vindicator is far less than the amount you'll spend tackling yourself if you fire up one of these Marauder siege modules.
nahjustwarpin
SUPER DUPER SPACE TRUCKS
#899 - 2013-08-30 20:05:05 UTC
Lephia DeGrande wrote:
Gorn Arming wrote:
These changes make very little sense.

The inability to receive remote reps while sieged means that these ships will see no use in large fleets. That hardly seems necessary on a ship that's already bonused towards active tanking with only a moderate 30% resist bonus applying towards remote reps.

Further, because this module anchors the Marauder in place for its duration, it's going to be incredibly risky (meaning not cost-effective) to use one of these in nullsec or lowsec PvE.

These Marauders seem to provide yet another reason for everyone to move their money-making characters to highsec. Is that really what we want?


I dunno if your view isnt to fleet fight centered? The changes arent meant to be for big fleet fights its still a Highend PvE Ship and they clearly stated this in the OP.

Its a welcome change after 6 years of ignoring Marauders because Pirate Ships where simply better...


with marauders speed and drone (slight dps) nerf and removal of web strength bonus pirate battleships will still be better
Cassius Invictus
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#900 - 2013-08-30 20:06:19 UTC
Hmm, this is unique and fun CCP :),

For PvE those will a beast ships:

1) long range as needed.
2) 2 flights of small drones - sufficient for PvE (no idea why people ***** about that - I already use 2 flights of small drones and 1 flight of salvage drones in my Paladin).
3) I didn't like the web bonus - I could not hit frigs anyway , and everything else was shot down just fine.
4) insane omni tank - the resists are still low but with 135% rep bonus it does not matter.
5) ewar immunity will just make other ships obsolete in lvl 4 missions (hope it works on tracing disruption).
6) they could use small dps bonus (like 10% or 15 %) but will still be good without it.

However for PvP:

1) no buffer
2) no dps advantage
3) immobile
4) asking for tornado alpha strike
5) still can be caped out I imagine and killed by small gang
6) asking for dreadnoughts guns attention
7) can't be remotely repped (no one will fly such an expensive ship without remote reps)
8) no real advantage over anything currently in use
9) can dominate next Alliance Tournament but only in this form of PvP it has its uses.

So PvE you did a great job, PvP those ships are still useless. They are too expensive and too fragile to be used. They are still worse than Pirate BS and u know what? I don’t see Pirate BS used for PvP (ok was killed once by small gang with Mach, but those guys were running a sick combo :) ). Their main downside (both Pirate and Marauders) is that for their massive price tag they have lower survivability that Command Ships and T3, and often don't have much higher dps (paper dps while its application is much worse that on commands and T3). They can have much HP but they suck with resists. So:

1) redesign marauders (unlikely and I love your changes for PvE)
2) fix Pirate BS (more likely)
3) Introduce new type of BS with T2 resists, T2 damage so its massive price would be justified by its advantages over commands and t3.