Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 200 .. 263 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 30 post(s) |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
768
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 00:08:00 -
[4831] - Quote
Kusum Fawn wrote:Slated for Rubicon
Never tested til TQ.
I love being an alpha tester. Sisi is scheduled to open Monday with these changes. |
visitante inferno
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
9
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 01:17:00 -
[4832] - Quote
I feel like the golem got the short end of the stick again... my favorite ship is prolly the crappiest. ohwell. goodthing i cross trained on all of them. also. one thing you mentioned is that they are not meant to out do pirate ships. I somewhat understand your point but at the same time that makes it "not worth my while" to train to t2 ships when i can just use a pirate faction...
|
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
536
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 01:35:00 -
[4833] - Quote
Battle Cube wrote:Joe Risalo wrote:Battle Cube wrote:im still at a loss for words....of how even to describe....this new version of the ship. I cant comprehend their reasoning.
Why would i want to sit still? In order for that to increase my effectiveness, i would need a really good bonus..... but range isnt a bonus, it only negates my immobility. Ok, mjd bonus so i can move around, but at 100k, i am negating my range bonus because i will be out of optimal. Ok i have ewar immunity, well thats only there so that being still isnt as terrible.
Everything on this ship is just to negate the horrible effects of something else on this ship, it seems designed by committee... No coherence.
and 'encouraging' mjd via nerfing the ship so normal speed, abs, and mwds are WAY WAY worse, is just Insulting. The only reason there could be for these nerfs is that using an MJD on this ship is SO OP that everyone is assumed to be doing it - therefore we have to nerf it (even for those who wont use an mjd) But thats not the case here.
Exactly the same reason for all the non-bastion mode nerfs, it will be useless without the useless module.
CCP: what is the purpose of the marauder? What is it supposed to do? What will it excel in that make its massive sp, isk costs and stupid drawbacks and nerfs, worth it such that it is better than other ships in said scenario?
edit: Maybe there are some very niche uses in pvp where you want to spend billions on a ridiculous ship and setup that is only good because its strange. Please dont balance the entire game for alliance tournaments. Thanks. I still say I love how bastion is.. The range doesn't mean much to me, but oh well. however, i have said several times that every nerf to the hull was not at all necessary. yeah i guess the one thing it DOES have is good solo tank. (although, personally, i dont want good solo tank at expense of rr, thats just me)
I agree, which is why I said the hull nerfs were unnecessary. They could have done everything they've done with bastion, and still buff the hull without making bastion OP. |
Sirius Fidelis
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 02:56:00 -
[4834] - Quote
One of my alliance mates mentioned that if Marauders could cause a "mini escalation" in C4 and/or C3s, then it would give them purpose and people would utilize them. I thought it could be an interesting way to give smaller lower class WH corps something to do in between PVP. |
Mocam
EVE University Ivy League
319
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 03:12:00 -
[4835] - Quote
If they pulled the range bonus stuff and put in some damage increase - that would make this hot but a parked ship shooting farther - that's not too much value for the expense - even against fixed targets (like POCO's and POS's) let alone other ships. |
Bogd Khan
Hedion University Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 03:14:00 -
[4836] - Quote
I just wonder who will use marauders in null after this? I dont know anyone who would be willing to go in "mini triage" in pve situation like null anom for example. What you do when neutral enters local warps to your site and lights cyno while your in "mini triage"? Just die? This marauder change sounds so stupid... Shuold i reprocess mine? As in marauder is pve ship that cannot be used in pve in future... Just wondering wth to do with marauder and skills that i cannot use in future... |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
538
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 03:37:00 -
[4837] - Quote
Bogd Khan wrote:I just wonder who will use marauders in null after this? I dont know anyone who would be willing to go in "mini triage" in pve situation like null anom for example. What you do when neutral enters local warps to your site and lights cyno while your in "mini triage"? Just die? This marauder change sounds so stupid... Shuold i reprocess mine? As in marauder is pve ship that cannot be used in pve in future... Just wondering wth to do with marauder and skills that i cannot use in future...
With the new warp mechanics, it should take him longer to get to you unless he's in a frig.... maybe cruiser.
However, if he does land in, you've probably had enough time to finish your cycle, or at least be most of the way through it.
That said, the odds of a neutral popping up in local exactly when you bastion is pretty slim... Either they're already there, or you're at least 15 seconds into the cycle.
As far as the rest, I'm thinking the self sustainability will make them a good ship for solo WH, low, and null PVE as you'll be able to tank more and use less ammo.. Not to mention ewar immunity.
I'm thinking they'll be more bang for your buck than they are now. |
Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
192
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 03:50:00 -
[4838] - Quote
You know, I wonder why CCP never considered to...you know...leave the hulls un-nerfed and aplly those nerfs through the bastion mod directly. Speed / Agility / Drone Control / HP penalties could be shifted to the bastion mod. That way, people that wish to use the bastion mod don't get an OP'ed boat and those that wish to run without it don't get a handicapped and overly expensive T2. It just dosn't make sense to me that they are butchering marauders just to make a new mod balanced. |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
538
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 03:58:00 -
[4839] - Quote
Sobaan Tali wrote:You know, I wonder why CCP never considered to...you know...leave the hulls un-nerfed and aplly those nerfs through the bastion mod directly. Speed / Agility / Drone Control / HP penalties could be shifted to the bastion mod. That way, people that wish to use the bastion mod don't get an OP'ed boat and those that wish to run without it don't get a handicapped and overly expensive T2. It just dosn't make sense to me that they are butchering marauders just to make a new mod balanced.
are you saying fitting penalties, so that when you fit the module you get the nerfs to the hull?
If so, I completely agree, and had considered that.
Take the base hull and buff everything that needs to be buffed, and balance it in a way to where it is fleet compatible.
Then, when you fit a bastion module it comes with a bunch of fitting penalties.
However, I would rather not get a mobility nerf with the bastion module... That's just not fair and only makes these ships less likely to be used with bastion... |
Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
193
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 04:17:00 -
[4840] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:Sobaan Tali wrote:You know, I wonder why CCP never considered to...you know...leave the hulls un-nerfed and aplly those nerfs through the bastion mod directly. Speed / Agility / Drone Control / HP penalties could be shifted to the bastion mod. That way, people that wish to use the bastion mod don't get an OP'ed boat and those that wish to run without it don't get a handicapped and overly expensive T2. It just dosn't make sense to me that they are butchering marauders just to make a new mod balanced. are you saying fitting penalties, so that when you fit the module you get the nerfs to the hull? If so, I completely agree, and had considered that. Take the base hull and buff everything that needs to be buffed, and balance it in a way to where it is fleet compatible. Then, when you fit a bastion module it comes with a bunch of fitting penalties. However, I would rather not get a mobility nerf with the bastion module... That's just not fair and only makes these ships less likely to be used with bastion...
Yes, absolutely. As far as what penalties and to their individual degree can be tweaked as we go, but I feel like it would make better sense to first migrate as much of the proposed alterations to the hulls to the bastion module. This would, I think, make the bastion module more of an actual fitting option to consider rather than an absolute necessity. |
|
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
538
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 04:23:00 -
[4841] - Quote
Sobaan Tali wrote:Joe Risalo wrote:Sobaan Tali wrote:You know, I wonder why CCP never considered to...you know...leave the hulls un-nerfed and aplly those nerfs through the bastion mod directly. Speed / Agility / Drone Control / HP penalties could be shifted to the bastion mod. That way, people that wish to use the bastion mod don't get an OP'ed boat and those that wish to run without it don't get a handicapped and overly expensive T2. It just dosn't make sense to me that they are butchering marauders just to make a new mod balanced. are you saying fitting penalties, so that when you fit the module you get the nerfs to the hull? If so, I completely agree, and had considered that. Take the base hull and buff everything that needs to be buffed, and balance it in a way to where it is fleet compatible. Then, when you fit a bastion module it comes with a bunch of fitting penalties. However, I would rather not get a mobility nerf with the bastion module... That's just not fair and only makes these ships less likely to be used with bastion... Yes, absolutely. As far as what penalties and to their individual degree can be tweaked as we go, but I feel like it would make better sense to first migrate as much of the proposed alterations to the hulls to the bastion module. This would, I think, make the bastion module more of an actual fitting option to consider rather than an absolute necessity.
Agreed.
Also, if we buff the hull and leave bastion alone, then (while the two wouldn't effect each other) you would have a ship that is too versatile because you'd be able to jump from one to another.
So, in giving fitting penalties to bastion to more or less FORCE bastion to be used in most cases, I feel is fair.. |
baltec1
Bat Country
8145
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 05:02:00 -
[4842] - Quote
Its amazing how many pve players are demanding a ship with no drawbacks. |
Lair Osen
Unlawful Unit Initiative Mercenaries
47
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 06:36:00 -
[4843] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Its amazing how many pve players are demanding a ship with no drawbacks.
More like they don't want their expensive ships nerfed in order to accommodate a module and playstyle that that will be detrimental for their activities for various reason. |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
538
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 06:57:00 -
[4844] - Quote
Lair Osen wrote:baltec1 wrote:Its amazing how many pve players are demanding a ship with no drawbacks. More like they don't want their expensive ships nerfed in order to accommodate a module and playstyle that that will be detrimental for their activities for various reason.
Not unless it's the module itself that nerfs the hull.
Basically, base hull would be fliable on it's own and fit well into a fleet. While fitting a bastion would nerf the hull in exchange for what bastion mode provides.
You can essentially equate it to bastion by-passing several on-board systems in order to give itself proper functionality.
Also, this would mean that you have to commit to whichever you fly and can't just have two ships balled up into one at the click of the mouse.
That said, after a long thinking process, I think the bonus to MJD should be given to another ship and leave the Marauder out of it, as it doesn't suit most PVE needs.
Give the bonus to blops, expecially if they're going to be splitting blops into two (which is what I've heard) |
Vinyl 41
Perkone Academy
1
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 07:16:00 -
[4845] - Quote
binding those hull nerfs to a single module will make that module useless because who would decide to use it when the gains from it would bring such huge limitations - there are allready huge concerns about the usefulness of the whole bastion module in both pve and pvp rubi hits sisi in 2 days so lets hope it wont be such a big missfire like most people expect |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
538
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 07:23:00 -
[4846] - Quote
Vinyl 41 wrote:binding those hull nerfs to a single module will make that module useless because who would decide to use it when the gains from it would bring such huge limitations - there are allready huge concerns about the usefulness of the whole bastion module in both pve and pvp rubi hits sisi in 2 days so lets hope it wont be such a big missfire like most people expect
Which is why I said you have to balance the perks and negatives.
While you would get better sensor strength without the module, it would still be one of the weaker sensor ships in Eve. Bastion would make you immune.
Without you would have 3 utility highs, bastion would be a utility module (assuming CCP takes away the extra high and puts it somewhere more useful and balanced.
Without you would have mobility, with you would have significantly more tank.
Also, they could remove all range bonuses from the hull, and focus purely on high tracking, while bastion could revert that tracking to range.
Things like that last one would make the ship nice outside of bastion, but for someone who wants ranged combat, they'd be better off with bastion. |
baltec1
Bat Country
8145
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 07:32:00 -
[4847] - Quote
Lair Osen wrote:baltec1 wrote:Its amazing how many pve players are demanding a ship with no drawbacks. More like they don't want their expensive ships nerfed in order to accommodate a module and playstyle that that may be detrimental for their activities for various reason.
I weep for the min/max pve players. |
marVLs
437
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 08:52:00 -
[4848] - Quote
Without dps bonus, unnerf to base hulls, and something useful instead of tractor range, that whole marauders rebalance makes them worse than before... |
Vinyl 41
Perkone Academy
1
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 09:10:00 -
[4849] - Quote
marVLs wrote:Without dps bonus, unnerf to base hulls, and something useful instead of tractor range, that whole marauders rebalance makes them worse than before... i totaly agree here besides the tractor bonus which i personaly liked so far - cant wait to test that new tractor structure ( which might make that bonus obsolete ) |
gascanu
Bearing Srl.
10
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 10:56:00 -
[4850] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
words... more words... even more words...
i'm sorry to say this, CCP Ytterbium, but it seems to me that you have no idea of what to do with this ship class, of what rolle they should fit in; how about you think about that for a bit and you postpone this "rebalance" until you have a clear idea about that?
also, if this will be done at the same time with the pirate bs rebalance, i think we will be able to see the entire picture even better
what i'm trying to say, is that atm , with current changes, the marauders look like the old weapon system on the Naglfar, you know, "the split weapon system", great on paper but terrible in practice; |
|
baltec1
Bat Country
8146
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 11:38:00 -
[4851] - Quote
gascanu wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:
words... more words... even more words...
i'm sorry to say this, CCP Ytterbium, but it seems to me that you have no idea of what to do with this ship class, of what rolle they should fit in; how about you think about that for a bit and you postpone this "rebalance" until you have a clear idea about that? also, if this will be done at the same time with the pirate bs rebalance, i think we will be able to see the entire picture even better what i'm trying to say, is that atm , with current changes, the marauders look like the old weapon system on the Naglfar, you know, "the split weapon system", great on paper but terrible in practice;
Only none of these ships have split weapon bonuses. Also they will be doing pirate BS this winter. Finally they have a very clear plan for long range boats with a very heavy active tank. |
gascanu
Bearing Srl.
11
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 13:25:00 -
[4852] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:gascanu wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:
words... more words... even more words...
i'm sorry to say this, CCP Ytterbium, but it seems to me that you have no idea of what to do with this ship class, of what rolle they should fit in; how about you think about that for a bit and you postpone this "rebalance" until you have a clear idea about that? also, if this will be done at the same time with the pirate bs rebalance, i think we will be able to see the entire picture even better what i'm trying to say, is that atm , with current changes, the marauders look like the old weapon system on the Naglfar, you know, "the split weapon system", great on paper but terrible in practice; Only none of these ships have split weapon bonuses. Also they will be doing pirate BS this winter. Finally they have a very clear plan for long range boats with a very heavy active tank.
i'm sorry to say that you missed my point entirely
p.s. can you point for me which one of the marauders have a split weapon bonuses? |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
538
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 13:49:00 -
[4853] - Quote
gascanu wrote:baltec1 wrote:gascanu wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:
words... more words... even more words...
i'm sorry to say this, CCP Ytterbium, but it seems to me that you have no idea of what to do with this ship class, of what rolle they should fit in; how about you think about that for a bit and you postpone this "rebalance" until you have a clear idea about that? also, if this will be done at the same time with the pirate bs rebalance, i think we will be able to see the entire picture even better what i'm trying to say, is that atm , with current changes, the marauders look like the old weapon system on the Naglfar, you know, "the split weapon system", great on paper but terrible in practice; Only none of these ships have split weapon bonuses. Also they will be doing pirate BS this winter. Finally they have a very clear plan for long range boats with a very heavy active tank. i'm sorry to say that you missed my point entirely p.s. can you point for me which one of the marauders have a split weapon bonuses?
He said "NONE of these ships have split weapon bonuses" which was in reference to your comment on the Naglfar. I suppose he's saying that using the Naglfar is a bad comparison. |
baltec1
Bat Country
8148
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 14:21:00 -
[4854] - Quote
Quote: He said "NONE of these ships have split weapon bonuses" which was in reference to your comment on the Naglfar. I suppose he's saying that using the Naglfar is a bad comparison.
Its almost as if he didnt bother to read either my post or CCPs... Or even his own. |
gascanu
Bearing Srl.
11
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 14:27:00 -
[4855] - Quote
have too admit my fault, i've read "one" instead of "none"
the other thing still stands tho |
Aglais
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
405
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 16:52:00 -
[4856] - Quote
Vinyl 41 wrote:binding those hull nerfs to a single module will make that module useless because who would decide to use it when the gains from it would bring such huge limitations - there are allready huge concerns about the usefulness of the whole bastion module in both pve and pvp rubi hits sisi in 2 days so lets hope it wont be such a big missfire like most people expect
This is going to be just as big a misfire as people expect.
There are too many things working against Marauders now for these changes to be even remotely good. Before anyone was aware of the warp speed changes, Marauders might have been a usable, if exceptionally boring to fly thing to use in PvE. Now?
Well, their warp speed has been crushed, on top of other mobility based hull nerfs. They still won't be used in PvP, ever, because having to be stationary on something with less than capital level tank is suicide (even if the bastion module will make the Marauders' defense "formidable", I doubt it'll quite be enough, somehow). Damage I'm not too worried about because they at least have ways to apply it, but still. Also, their utility in PvP is probably going to be called into question by the warp changes as well, I think.
This whole role, and the "Long range ship with heavy active tank" niche that it looks like they're trying to go for, is absolutely stupid. If you're attacking at ~100km+, you barely need tank, and
Wait. Wait a second.
Spool up time for the MJD is something like 11-12 seconds, isn't it?
Warp time for interceptors at that range is like 4 seconds now, isn't it?
5-6 seconds to scan, 4 to warp = dead long range marauders.
It seems to me that this "role" is already dead in the water on all possible fronts- please reconsider this entire path, both iteration 1 and 2. |
Gel Musana
LOL a Sticky Situation
24
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 17:00:00 -
[4857] - Quote
Vulfen wrote:BaBaBarbara Ann wrote:Well I'm flying a Golem in a null sec drone region, and you know what? it's awsome running patarol with a torpy golem with 25M isk/tik + 5-15 M salvaging (3 patrol/hour, 1 patrol tik). Now i'd like a refound for the marauder skill and i want someone (maybe a dev ) to come here and buy my golem (i wont bring it to empire ) Torpy golem is useless everywhere but here, like i said, and here for me a 25M isk/tik is a very effective ship BUT with the upcoming patch the Golem will be nerfed too much as far as TANKING NERF it will LOOSE THE 7,5% sb bonus replaced by a flat 30% from bastion (is 7,5% less) it will have SAME RESIS ( golem now is 0% and 50%,it'll get 0 and 50%, Alvus Queen thanks you) cap recharge nerf SALVAGING NERF Salvage drones or Scout drones that's the question. Art Thou shalt drop my bandwith, not my drone bay! ESCAPING SLOWED -bastion -neutral come from wh - un-bastion - alling neut: "hello Golem, wanna meet my scramb?) me: "ofc, sure, do as you please" neut: "ty, you are very kind" me: "np, you are welcome" net: "Can i call some friends?" me: "Sure, do it, the more we are the better!" So i've trained a PVE boat, you know, for PVE! Why the hell I've to find myself in a pvp boat?? With the same logic MAKE THE MACHARIEL AN INDY! all together: "MAKE THE MACHARIEL AN INDY!" I apologize but with my all lvl 5 skilled TENGU i can reach 17M/tik at best (running horde) and with the upcoming patch my golem won't run patrol like this so it means a loss of 500 M isk month +/- If only i could trade my golem with a RSI Allow me to put your mind at ease... you DON'T have to bastion so you can run away... CCP doesnt want to make it so people like you can go around making money all day with no real risk RISK=REWARD
Excuse me Sir, I think you are dreaming. Just going out with a 1b+ ship is a risk on its own. Get blown up and it's two Plexes.
Ideology -ás-h-i-t -álist https://gate.eveonline.com/Profile/Gel%20Musana
|
Gel Musana
LOL a Sticky Situation
24
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 17:02:00 -
[4858] - Quote
chaosgrimm wrote: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. WeGÇÖll 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. Tyvm for the update
So rebalance means Nerf? Ideology -ás-h-i-t -álist https://gate.eveonline.com/Profile/Gel%20Musana
|
Gel Musana
LOL a Sticky Situation
24
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 17:09:00 -
[4859] - Quote
Edora Madullier wrote: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. WeGÇÖll 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. Thank you! I can't wait to test Kronos, Paladin and Vargur on SiSi, though I doubt the Vargur will perform well as a sniper, considering the arties' DPS. Good luck fitting arties on the Vargur... Ideology -ás-h-i-t -álist https://gate.eveonline.com/Profile/Gel%20Musana
|
Vinyl 41
Perkone Academy
1
|
Posted - 2013.10.05 17:09:00 -
[4860] - Quote
Gel Musana wrote:
So rebalance means Nerf?
well they did 1 buff actually and thats the signature buff everything else is a flat our nerf to the uhm least used ship class in the game used by a few missioners with crapstable connection |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 200 .. 263 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |