These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Cade Windstalker
#1281 - 2013-09-01 10:54:20 UTC
Silvetica Dian wrote:

Tengu doctrine has long been a CFC favourite and they did indeed field hundreds at a time.
Loki doctrines have also been popular in null.
Tempest Fleet Issues were also a CFC doctrine until they used them against BL and 401k to defend a titan production POS and lost the fleet and the in-build super. They were quickly phased out although i suspect not for reasons of cost.
(more likely how easily they were countered / replacing them via FW limits supply/ it was hugely embarrassing loss) pick one or more of the above or add your own flavour.
We are talking about large null entities with sov bills of hundreds of bill isk a month and incomes of hundreds of bill per month with alliance wallets in the trillions. The cost of a doctrine is worth it if you can use it to successfully and efficiently use it to hold your moons, sov assets etc.
If these ships can be used to create real battlefield advantages in certain situation they will be used in those situations and potentially in vast numbers. For example people like to bring a couple of hundred celestis as a support fleet and thus neutralise the opposing fleets ability to either use logi or to apply dps. These ships with ewar immunity and huge local tank could quickly turn such support fleet to ash allowing the conventional fleet to operate normally once more. The warlords of null will decide if this is worth it /a bad idea/ whatever but i throw it out as an idea of how people might be thinking.


I think I'm going to go with "and that's fine" I just don't think it's likely to happen with these. Since it looks like CCP are going to rebalance Pirate Battleships more for raw DPS and a bit of maneuverability I'd say that they're a more likely candidate for the next FOTM fleet than these are. We're already seeing Rattlesnakes being used in relatively small numbers. As you said though, the CFC phased out the Tempest Fleet Issue doctrine for a reason. On the flip-side we've seen T1 BS fleets survive through everything the Meta has thrown at them.

I think the big difference between Marauders and T3s, Faction ships, and various Battlecruiser doctrines is that the latter are relatively low skill where as the former are going to be fairly SP intensive to fly well. Regardless of cost you still need pilots with the SP to make a doctrine work. So, even if someone does find a hilariously powerful fleet role for these ships (which I'm having a hard time believing right at the moment) the skills required to fit and fly them effectively are going to stop them from being fielded in large numbers by most parties.

If they end up filling up a few squads in a specialist role in fleets then... well great? They've found a Niche PvP roll in the things that make Eve famous, large fleet fights. Why should anyone be mad about that? If you don't like them then don't train for them.
Mc Cormeg
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1282 - 2013-09-01 10:55:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Mc Cormeg
baltec1 wrote:


You are getting improved sensor strength, damage projection and resists...


Well. Ok lets clarify that. U dont get more sensor strength. Ur base sensor strength is exactly the same as befor. U got EWAR immunity in siege mode. That seems to have a simmilar effect but just works under completely other circumstances. Second, u gain range right. But if i say dmg projection im not talking about range, which u already had alot. Im talking about tracking and missile dmg application to fast and smaller targets. Again thats not what u can expect from the siege mode. Third, the ressistence gain again u only get in siege mode.

At a first glace this sounds not terribly bad. But u have to do a hughe tradeoff in moveability to get these bonuses. A tradeoff which i gues u cant afford in common pvp situations. But thats allready been said.
Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#1283 - 2013-09-01 11:08:05 UTC
Still think these should have the option to fit something akin to a dreadnought seige module (as an alternative to the bastion module) to make them into POS bashing machines that can be used in C1-C3 w-space and highsec.

Otherwise loving the idea.

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com
Cade Windstalker
#1284 - 2013-09-01 11:08:16 UTC
Mc Cormeg wrote:
baltec1 wrote:


You are getting improved sensor strength, damage projection and resists...


Well. Ok lets clarify that. U dont get more sensor strength. Ur base sensor strength is exactly the same as befor. U got EWAR immunity in siege mode. That seems to have a simmilar effect but just works under completely other circumstances. Second, u gain range right. But if i say dmg projection im not talking about range, which u already had alot. Im talking about tracking and missile dmg application to fast and smaller targets. Again thats not what u can expect from the siege mode. Third, the ressistence gain again u only get in siege mode.

At a first glace this sounds not terribly bad. But u have to do a hughe tradeoff in moveability to get these bonuses. A tradeoff which i gues u cant afford in common pvp situations. But thats allready been said.


So, first off damage projection and damage application are two entirely different things.

Damage projection is how far you can project damage effectively. For turrets this is Optimal and Falloff, for missiles it's Flight Time and Velocity.

Damage application is how effectively you can apply damage to a target, for turrets this is tracking and resolution, for missiles it's explosion radius and velocity. The Golem is currently getting the short end of the stick here but that changes significantly if we get Missile damage application and projection modules like Rise hinted at.

As for the trade-offs, well yes, these aren't supposed to be PvP god-boats. Ytterbium flat out says that they're only supposed to have Niche PvP roles. The Bastion and MJD bonuses give them a unique and solid mechanic for PvE that can be applied in interesting and niche ways to PvP. The generalist DPS boats are slated to be the pirate battleships and the Black-Ops are going to be filling another, probably more PvP focused niche, likely focusing on mobility and speed given their already existing bonuses but maybe incorporating more off the wall stuff given that they're very infrequently used in combat and CCP has already talked about splitting the hull class into supporting and combat variants.
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1285 - 2013-09-01 11:08:33 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Silvetica Dian wrote:

Tengu doctrine has long been a CFC favourite and they did indeed field hundreds at a time.
Loki doctrines have also been popular in null.
Tempest Fleet Issues were also a CFC doctrine until they used them against BL and 401k to defend a titan production POS and lost the fleet and the in-build super. They were quickly phased out although i suspect not for reasons of cost.
(more likely how easily they were countered / replacing them via FW limits supply/ it was hugely embarrassing loss) pick one or more of the above or add your own flavour.
We are talking about large null entities with sov bills of hundreds of bill isk a month and incomes of hundreds of bill per month with alliance wallets in the trillions. The cost of a doctrine is worth it if you can use it to successfully and efficiently use it to hold your moons, sov assets etc.
If these ships can be used to create real battlefield advantages in certain situation they will be used in those situations and potentially in vast numbers. For example people like to bring a couple of hundred celestis as a support fleet and thus neutralise the opposing fleets ability to either use logi or to apply dps. These ships with ewar immunity and huge local tank could quickly turn such support fleet to ash allowing the conventional fleet to operate normally once more. The warlords of null will decide if this is worth it /a bad idea/ whatever but i throw it out as an idea of how people might be thinking.


I think I'm going to go with "and that's fine" I just don't think it's likely to happen with these. Since it looks like CCP are going to rebalance Pirate Battleships more for raw DPS and a bit of maneuverability I'd say that they're a more likely candidate for the next FOTM fleet than these are. We're already seeing Rattlesnakes being used in relatively small numbers. As you said though, the CFC phased out the Tempest Fleet Issue doctrine for a reason. On the flip-side we've seen T1 BS fleets survive through everything the Meta has thrown at them.

I think the big difference between Marauders and T3s, Faction ships, and various Battlecruiser doctrines is that the latter are relatively low skill where as the former are going to be fairly SP intensive to fly well. Regardless of cost you still need pilots with the SP to make a doctrine work. So, even if someone does find a hilariously powerful fleet role for these ships (which I'm having a hard time believing right at the moment) the skills required to fit and fly them effectively are going to stop them from being fielded in large numbers by most parties.

If they end up filling up a few squads in a specialist role in fleets then... well great? They've found a Niche PvP roll in the things that make Eve famous, large fleet fights. Why should anyone be mad about that? If you don't like them then don't train for them.


You see rattlers because they are far and away the cheapest Pirate BS because generally people don't rat with them, it takes forever and tengu does it faster (amoung other things) when you have 1-1.5 bill hull prices for the rest of them you can't really FTOM, there simply isn' the market to support losses.
Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
#1286 - 2013-09-01 11:14:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Lephia DeGrande
Mc Cormeg wrote:
below...




My point is, you will get your :

"Improve sensor strength. Or dmg projection. Increase base resistence or give them a HeatDMG Bonus. There are alot of viable options here. Choose one or all of them if you wish. What ever you need to buff them significantly but at the same time prevent them from being overpowered."

With the upcoming balancing of the Pirate Ships they will become this, so why do we need 5 different Ships Types (T1 especially Tier 3, T2 Marauders with Sensor Boost/ Black Ops after Balancing, Faction after Balancing and Navy Battleships) which can all run PvE just fine, PvP good enough? THEN introduce ANOTHER BS Ship only for "Bastion" Test...

You want a High Damage Application Battleship for 1 Bill with great tank and decent speed, for easy PvE and good PvP? Grab your favorite Pirate Ship, Rattle, Vindi, Nightmare, Machariel or The Omnomnom Baal.
Its to expensive? Ok, grab one of the awesome Navy Ships instead!
Still to expensive? Try one of the 12(!) nice Battleships.

Not enough? We still have 4 more Marauders left and another 4 Black Ops.

Oh and intrudoce 4 new Bastion Battleships to.

Come on, how much ships do u really need?!

Meet the Mario Kart 8 - Capsuleer Club Cup
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1287 - 2013-09-01 11:21:37 UTC
Mc Cormeg wrote:
baltec1 wrote:


You are getting improved sensor strength, damage projection and resists...


Well. Ok lets clarify that. U dont get more sensor strength. Ur base sensor strength is exactly the same as befor. U got EWAR immunity in siege mode. That seems to have a simmilar effect but just works under completely other circumstances. Second, u gain range right. But if i say dmg projection im not talking about range, which u already had alot. Im talking about tracking and missile dmg application to fast and smaller targets. Again thats not what u can expect from the siege mode. Third, the ressistence gain again u only get in siege mode.

At a first glace this sounds not terribly bad. But u have to do a hughe tradeoff in moveability to get these bonuses. A tradeoff which i gues u cant afford in common pvp situations. But thats allready been said.


Park it on a station or gate, blap target, mjd away, repeat or gtfo.

For small fleet work it looks good.

Being imune to E-war is as good as it gets for sensor strength. Longer falloff and optimal will mean more damage and those extra resists are nice. Sitting still for a minute is not that bad of a drawback for these things, afterall, your mjd will be ready to go the second you come out of mancannon mode.
Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
#1288 - 2013-09-01 11:24:23 UTC
I think they are able to tank gate sentrys so fine, they will become some nice tool for gate camping, especially in a well made gate camp.

Meet the Mario Kart 8 - Capsuleer Club Cup
Cade Windstalker
#1289 - 2013-09-01 11:31:05 UTC
Onictus wrote:

You see rattlers because they are far and away the cheapest Pirate BS because generally people don't rat with them, it takes forever and tengu does it faster (amoung other things) when you have 1-1.5 bill hull prices for the rest of them you can't really FTOM, there simply isn' the market to support losses.


Since Marauders currently run you about .8-1.1 billion and demand (and price) for them seems like it's going to shoot up after these changes that only supports the other half of my argument that there's very little risk of these becoming FOTM in Null (or anywhere else in PvP).

baltec1 wrote:

Park it on a station or gate, blap target, mjd away, repeat or gtfo.

For small fleet work it looks good.

Being imune to E-war is as good as it gets for sensor strength. Longer falloff and optimal will mean more damage and those extra resists are nice. Sitting still for a minute is not that bad of a drawback for these things, afterall, your mjd will be ready to go the second you come out of mancannon mode.


Except that these ships don't really have the DPS to "blap" a target. They can tank very well but they're not really "blap" ships.

They lack the sensor strength to lock anything they can kill in one shot before it warps off from a a gate or station and they can't hold anything they can lock fast enough for a long enough period to kill it.

If they've got something else holding the target down then you're just as well off in an Attack Battlecruiser or two since most things won't be able to hit you or will be too busy trying to peal your tackle off them so they can escape.

Also the MJD takes at least 9 seconds to spool up meaning you're spending at least that long there without your mega-tank. You know, unless you get scrammed.

Lephia DeGrande wrote:
I think they are able to tank gate sentrys so fine, they will become some nice tool for gate camping, especially in a well made gate camp.


As opposed to any other battleship with Logi support and the ability to GTFO without 60 seconds notice? In my experience Logi is generally one of the hallmarks of a well-made gate-camp.
Mc Cormeg
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1290 - 2013-09-01 11:31:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Mc Cormeg
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Mc Cormeg wrote:
baltec1 wrote:


You are getting improved sensor strength, damage projection and resists...


Well. Ok lets clarify that. U dont get more sensor strength. Ur base sensor strength is exactly the same as befor. U got EWAR immunity in siege mode. That seems to have a simmilar effect but just works under completely other circumstances. Second, u gain range right. But if i say dmg projection im not talking about range, which u already had alot. Im talking about tracking and missile dmg application to fast and smaller targets. Again thats not what u can expect from the siege mode. Third, the ressistence gain again u only get in siege mode.

At a first glace this sounds not terribly bad. But u have to do a hughe tradeoff in moveability to get these bonuses. A tradeoff which i gues u cant afford in common pvp situations. But thats allready been said.


So, first off damage projection and damage application are two entirely different things.

Damage projection is how far you can project damage effectively. For turrets this is Optimal and Falloff, for missiles it's Flight Time and Velocity.

Damage application is how effectively you can apply damage to a target, for turrets this is tracking and resolution, for missiles it's explosion radius and velocity. The Golem is currently getting the short end of the stick here but that changes significantly if we get Missile damage application and projection modules like Rise hinted at.


Yea i know range is not tracking etc. Thanks. Lets not discuss over the fakt, that i mistakenly used the wrong term for tracking and exp velocity/signature radius of missiles. :D Appologises for that. I meant to say "dmg application" in your terms.

I dont know of any hint about new missile "tracking" mods. Maybe u can provide a source for that? Or do you mean the proposed tracking computer chage which maybe will affect missile stats in the future?

Quote:

As for the trade-offs, well yes, these aren't supposed to be PvP god-boats. Ytterbium flat out says that they're only supposed to have Niche PvP roles. The Bastion and MJD bonuses give them a unique and solid mechanic for PvE that can be applied in interesting and niche ways to PvP.


Yea. Thats the way CCP seems to go. I only doubt that this will play out well in PVE and PVP. As i said i imagine, that the bonuses i talked about (and without this siege mode which forces you to brick mode) are much much stronger and more suitable to achieve better performence in PVE as well as more useability in PVP.

But i guess thats highly subjective and depends strongly on personel EVE experience and favored gameplay styles. But thats how it is. I dont like the changes very much and im sad that the current Marauders have to suffer in favor for a siege mode and a mjd bonus among which neither the one or the other fitts the current marauder very well.

By the way, this would be much more beareable if they put this new fency stuff on top of the curren marauders without nerfing their base stats compared to the actuall stats. I dont se how the old speed and dronebandwith/bay interfere with the proposed siege mode and MJD Bonus in a way that makes them to strong.
Tobias Hareka
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#1291 - 2013-09-01 11:33:53 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Unfortunately I lack any sort of mental encyclopedia of major null-sec fleet fights and don't know of any sort of comprehensive listing of such things so the best I could do is look up Asakai (warning, lags on load) and look for T3s there. Overall between the two sides there's about 2-3 squads of Legions, half a squad of Protei, a squad and a half of Lokis, and all of *two* Tengus.


Look at battle reports from 2011 and 2012

One example of kill involving a lot of Tengus:
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=9560009&nolimit

http://jestertrek.blogspot.fi/2011/04/thundercats-are-go.html
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1292 - 2013-09-01 11:34:02 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Onictus wrote:

You see rattlers because they are far and away the cheapest Pirate BS because generally people don't rat with them, it takes forever and tengu does it faster (amoung other things) when you have 1-1.5 bill hull prices for the rest of them you can't really FTOM, there simply isn' the market to support losses.


Since Marauders currently run you about .8-1.1 billion and demand (and price) for them seems like it's going to shoot up after these changes that only supports the other half of my argument that there's very little risk of these becoming FOTM in Null (or anywhere else in PvP).




Other than bait I can'timagine what you would use them for.

Local reps mean that they are going to be next to useless in null in and of their own, fly around low in something like that and you will draw everyone with an intel channel for like 3 regions around.

Without the basion mod you have a something that a T1 BS does better, so its sort of a why bother thing in my book.
Grombutz
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1293 - 2013-09-01 11:44:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Grombutz
baltec1 wrote:

As for the trade-offs, well yes, these aren't supposed to be PvP god-boats. Ytterbium flat out says that they're only supposed to have Niche PvP roles. The Bastion and MJD bonuses give them a unique and solid mechanic for PvE that can be applied in interesting and niche ways to PvP. The generalist DPS boats are slated to be the pirate battleships and the Black-Ops are going to be filling another, probably more PvP focused niche, likely focusing on mobility and speed given their already existing bonuses but maybe incorporating more off the wall stuff given that they're very infrequently used in combat and CCP has already talked about splitting the hull class into supporting and combat variants.


A niche is fine, aslong as it's having its use.

Bastion and MJD however, are too much of a niche role (atleast for PvE). You don't need an MJD, nor a 100 rep-bonus, nor an increase in Range (especially on the golem) in PVE - especially with the inherent drawbacks (no mobility/RR in bastion - MJD makes salvaging impossible).

With this changes, Marauders become valid for vary few kinds of PVE.

1.) are situations where you need a lot of tank, and those usually happen in low/null/incursions only. For low/Null, you would be crazy if you would bring a bastioned marauder into a 10/10 or similar - yeah, you might be able to do it, but you increase the chance of getting caught. Would you do this if you have saver alternatives?

Incursions are the same - wow, you could do vanguards in bastion, but why? It is impractical (no RR), and you would actually slow down the whole fleet thanks to waiting for bastion to run out and the lack of a damage bonus. Again, why?

2.) are situations where you are e-war'ed a lot. Those do happen (sansha blockade, I'm talking to ya) rarely. Possible that "The Blockade" in it's variants is the only mission where bastion is actually useful.

And that's it. You probably noticed that I haven't said a word about the MJD - this is because it's absolutely useless in PvE for well-skilled pilots (which Marauder-pilots need to be) - even more if the ship doesn't have the capability for sentries..

At this point, one does have to question why it has to be a "one in a million"-kind of niche? Why should this increase their usage over Faction/pirate BS? For me, I will stick to my CNR + Noctis combo, as it does the job better (especially with the nerfs in mobility, and the inherent drawback of having 4 launchers only [Defenders!]).

I will probably use my golem for the fun of transforming though :D
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1294 - 2013-09-01 11:47:17 UTC
Quote:

baltec1 wrote:

Park it on a station or gate, blap target, mjd away, repeat or gtfo.

For small fleet work it looks good.

Being imune to E-war is as good as it gets for sensor strength. Longer falloff and optimal will mean more damage and those extra resists are nice. Sitting still for a minute is not that bad of a drawback for these things, afterall, your mjd will be ready to go the second you come out of mancannon mode.


Except that these ships don't really have the DPS to "blap" a target. They can tank very well but they're not really "blap" ships.



Also the MJD takes at least 9 seconds to spool up meaning you're spending at least that long there without your mega-tank. You know, unless you get scrammed.

.


A group of 3 to 5 of these fitted with a sebo and a few tackle frigates will be a good small gang. A 55km blaster mega sounds very interesting to me.
Max Kolonko
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1295 - 2013-09-01 11:49:16 UTC
Can we jump trough WH with bastion active? This would be nice alternative to using Capitals as WH closers

Read and support: Don't mess with OUR WH's What is Your stance on WH stuff?
Cade Windstalker
#1296 - 2013-09-01 12:00:24 UTC
Mc Cormeg wrote:

Yea i know range is not tracking etc. Thanks. Lets not discuss over the fakt, that i mistakenly used the wrong term for tracking and exp velocity/signature radius of missiles. :D Appologises for that. I meant to say "dmg application" in your terms.

I dont know of any hint about new missile "tracking" mods. Maybe u can provide a source for that? Or do you mean the proposed tracking computer chage which maybe will affect missile stats in the future?


Ask and you shall receive. CCP Rise on the future of missiles.


Mc Cormeg wrote:
Yea. Thats the way CCP seems to go. I only doubt that this will play out well in PVE and PVP. As i said i imagine, that the bonuses i talked about (and without this siege mode which forces you to brick mode) are much much stronger and more suitable to achieve better performence in PVE as well as more useability in PVP.


Yup, which is why I said they're not supposed to be PvP god-ships. These are not supposed to be Battleship sized HACs and begging for just buffed up T2 versions of T1 Battleships is not going to go anywhere. I rather suspect that begging for the web bonus to come back is similarly not going to happen. It's way too powerful for no trade-offs.

Mc Cormeg wrote:
But i guess thats highly subjective and depends strongly on personel EVE experience and favored gameplay styles. But thats how it is. I dont like the changes very much and im sad that the current Marauders have to suffer in favor for a siege mode and a mjd bonus among which neither the one or the other fitts the current marauder very well.

By the way, this would be much more beareable if they put this new fency stuff on top of the curren marauders without nerfing their base stats compared to the actuall stats. I dont se how the old speed and dronebandwith/bay interfere with the proposed siege mode and MJD Bonus in a way that makes them to strong.


I think off all the complaints and suggestions I've seen the drone-bay one carries the most weight. The bandwidth can go, these ships shouldn't be getting a good chunk of DPS from drones, but not being able to carry more than 2 flights of Light Drones is really annoying for missions and pretty much anything PvE related. They may be concerned about these ships being able to easily swat tackle-frigates in PvP but I don't see that changing whether it's 2 flights of Light Drones or 4.

The speed nerf is probably to reinforce differences with ships that we haven't seen yet, namely the revamped Pirate Battleships and Black-Ops Battleships and as a trade-off for the MJD bonus (which is a pretty strong mobility buff in missions and scan-sites).
Vulfen
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#1297 - 2013-09-01 12:13:19 UTC
@ CCP i dont think marauders need to be re balanced as they make good pve based weapons, instead maybe make t2 versions of the tier3 BS, since the bastion module looks more like a "combat" module rather than an "attack" module so if you did it with the tier3 bs it would be more in-keeping with the "tierticle regime"
Cade Windstalker
#1298 - 2013-09-01 12:14:40 UTC
Tobias Hareka wrote:
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Unfortunately I lack any sort of mental encyclopedia of major null-sec fleet fights and don't know of any sort of comprehensive listing of such things so the best I could do is look up Asakai (warning, lags on load) and look for T3s there. Overall between the two sides there's about 2-3 squads of Legions, half a squad of Protei, a squad and a half of Lokis, and all of *two* Tengus.


Look at battle reports from 2011 and 2012

One example of kill involving a lot of Tengus:
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=9560009&nolimit

http://jestertrek.blogspot.fi/2011/04/thundercats-are-go.html


Each of those fights has, at most, a Wing of T3s on any one side.

Also one of the participants is Pandemic Legion, who are hardly an average case for Null Sec fleet doctrines.

baltec1 wrote:

A group of 3 to 5 of these fitted with a sebo and a few tackle frigates will be a good small gang. A 55km blaster mega sounds very interesting to me.


Interesting maybe, but I'm going to have to see it in action before I'll view it as more than a gimmick that can be done just as well if not better for cheaper. For a start a Rokh with a few Tracking Computers can hit almost that far in Optimal + Falloff with Null.

Grombutz wrote:

A niche is fine, aslong as it's having its use.

Bastion and MJD however, are too much of a niche role (atleast for PvE). You don't need an MJD, nor a 100 rep-bonus, nor an increase in Range (especially on the golem) in PVE - especially with the inherent drawbacks (no mobility/RR in bastion - MJD makes salvaging impossible).

With this changes, Marauders become valid for vary few kinds of PVE.

1.) are situations where you need a lot of tank, and those usually happen in low/null/incursions only. For low/Null, you would be crazy if you would bring a bastioned marauder into a 10/10 or similar - yeah, you might be able to do it, but you increase the chance of getting caught. Would you do this if you have saver alternatives?

Incursions are the same - wow, you could do vanguards in bastion, but why? It is impractical (no RR), and you would actually slow down the whole fleet thanks to waiting for bastion to run out and the lack of a damage bonus. Again, why?

2.) are situations where you are e-war'ed a lot. Those do happen (sansha blockade, I'm talking to ya) rarely. Possible that "The Blockade" in it's variants is the only mission where bastion is actually useful.

And that's it. You probably noticed that I haven't said a word about the MJD - this is because it's absolutely useless in PvE for well-skilled pilots (which Marauder-pilots need to be) - even more if the ship doesn't have the capability for sentries..

At this point, one does have to question why it has to be a "one in a million"-kind of niche? Why should this increase their usage over Faction/pirate BS? For me, I will stick to my CNR + Noctis combo, as it does the job better (especially with the nerfs in mobility, and the inherent drawback of having 4 launchers only [Defenders!]).

I will probably use my golem for the fun of transforming though :D


Try thinking of it like this. You don't need to fit a massive tank, you can strip modules that are otherwise required for a mission like a Shield Boost Amp for a Golem off and replace them with damage application mods like extra Target Painters, missile damage app mods if we ever get them, cap mods, or prop mods.

The extra range can make Torp fits more viable, especially combine with the Target Painter bonus and freed up slots.

E-War is fairly common is missions and sites as well, and while it's not crippling it cuts down on completion times and is very frustrating. The Bastion mode E-War immunity lets you get around this and speeds up your mission or site times. It also gets rid of a frequent complaint with Marauders without giving them a flat buff for PvP.

The Defender Missiles point is very valid and I'd like to see something like a Missile HP buff added either to the Golem or to Bastion to make up for it since that seems to really hinder the ship at least with Cruise-Missile setups.

Overall though if you want to stick to your CNR that's your choice, I think if the ship is completely too good to resist then CCP have over-buffed it.
Vulfen
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#1299 - 2013-09-01 12:22:41 UTC
@ CCP i dont think marauders need to be re balanced as they make good pve "specialised based weapons, and can be used in pvp , instead maybe make t2 versions of the tier3 BS, since the bastion module looks more like a "combat" module rather than an "attack" module so if you did it with the tier3 bs it would be more in-keeping with the "tierticle regime"

+ it would be an awesome sight seeing the Abaddon transform
RTSAvalanche
Societas Imperialis Sceptri Coronaeque
Khimi Harar
#1300 - 2013-09-01 12:28:22 UTC
Nice idea I suppose - "mini dreads"

but no DPS bonus for committing so much isk to the field??


Also... wtf CCP.. no web bonus.. that was the ONE THING that made the Paladin awsome... give it back nooawww please!!