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) |
Doed
Tyrfing Industries Viro Mors Non Est
51
|
Posted - 2013.10.16 14:18:00 -
[5851] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:Also Ytterbium -have you considered replacing TP bonus on golem for an explosion radius bonus???
Thatd be a bad idea. |
baltec1
Bat Country
8252
|
Posted - 2013.10.16 14:20:00 -
[5852] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:The problem with incursions is that they are designed so you have to fly a battleship and try to hit frigs doing 3km/s .... its not real pvp in any sense of the word incursions are totally backwards .. they are broken and need fixing really don't blame Ytterbium for not catering to a broken system
To be fair, CCP Ytterbium's tactic of MJD out and blap the small stuff as they chase is the best way of dealing with them. |
The Djego
Hellequin Inc. Mean Coalition
195
|
Posted - 2013.10.16 14:20:00 -
[5853] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:If we weren't listening to player feedback, we wouldn't have modified the hulls to un-nerf them, or haven't spent the time to read through this thread or discussed Marauders for hours with the other Devs. We do respect your opinion, but Devs cannot please everyone in the community when rebalancing things in a live MMO. That's just the sad truth that we have to live with. Now, we are not saying we are guaranteed 100% future-proof right regarding the previous statement. We said internal play testing showed us there were other ways for them in Incursions - we are willing to keep an open mind and openly admit we were wrong if those aren't used at all in Incursions when they go live. After all, we have been wrong before. If the previous post was deemed offensive to the Incursion community, we do apologize and will tweak it in consequence. However, if they need to be further tweaked for Incursions, it will be after we can see some more hard live data on how they actually fare.
Well I am a Inc FC to and used to tell people every day that the stupid stuff they come up with doesn't work, because you kind of know what works and what not after a few years, flying and fcing nearly all gang compositions(from legion blitz, 11+1 contest setups, grid stuff that is based around 90% webs or contest setups that are based around instalock and alpha, static gangs, mwd fleets and what not). If you try this things on the live server you will get face raped by ICU or other channels with contest setups, because 11+1 one slot tanked dps will wish the floor with active tanked marauders, bastion is useless for bigger sites and the only reason marauders get used is that they are competitive, without being competitive you lose the pilots and everything falls apart.
Is it really so much to ask for to keep the current marauders in the game(even with all her issues) as 2. type of marauder? This is not only for Incs(also for most other PVE) but a lot of other applications(including pvping with 90% webs in ships that are not bricks) to where the old marauders are a lot better than the new ones. Improve discharge rigging: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=246166&find=unread
|
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
587
|
Posted - 2013.10.16 14:23:00 -
[5854] - Quote
Doed wrote:Harvey James wrote:Also Ytterbium -have you considered replacing TP bonus on golem for an explosion radius bonus???
Thatd be a bad idea.
Agreed, that would mean the Golem would be given 2-3 extra mids for whatever. Leaving the TP bonus means that they require the TPs instead of having tons of extra mids. |
Debora Tsung
The Investment Bankers Guild
533
|
Posted - 2013.10.16 14:25:00 -
[5855] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:Also Ytterbium -have you considered replacing TP bonus on golem for an explosion radius bonus???
Sounds like a bad idea tbh.
The TP benefits your whole gang, the explo radius bonus only yourself. And it's not even as good as the TP bonus. Stupidity should be a bannable offense.
Also This --> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=216699 Please stop making "afk cloak" threads, thanks in advance. |
Tragedy
The Creepshow
114
|
Posted - 2013.10.16 14:25:00 -
[5856] - Quote
Any reason why the vargur has the highest mass of all these ships? Its tech 2 yeah, its still minmatar tech 2. Slightly less rust. Why is it heavier then amarr and caldari bricks? |
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
1345
|
Posted - 2013.10.16 14:25:00 -
[5857] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:The Djego wrote:Joe Risalo wrote:I don't get what all the QQ is about on the overtanking.
People complain about the overtank - The overtank is intended to allow them to perform in other areas where more tank is required. Yes, they overtank lvl 4 missions. However, they're designed for pve, so why wouldn't they be able to overtank lvl 4's? They overtank because their tank is designed for much larger engagements. The fact that these ships can aggro an entire room without worrying about aggroes/triggers means that they do indeed clear rooms faster. When you're watching aggroes/triggers, you're actually going slower.
It is called being lazy, not paying attention, being unable to figure out the pve mechanics and want pve as brain afk as possible. It has nothing to do with doing pve effective or even remotely fast. Nobody that can do this would fit a 1k dps active tank on the hull since it is a utterly wast of slots and time, because you only need it if you are slow, not paying attention and ignoring the mechanics. It doesn't work that way in Marauders... Their uber tank requires attention, you down targets in 1-5 volleys, and you have to MJD away to reduce tracking at times. The uber tank allows these ships to be able to do things they could do before. WH pve, lvl 5 missions... Of all the ships in Eve, Marauders should be allowed to solo lvl 5's. If this means they overtank lvl 4's... That's completely fair.
Do you seriously think that people will immobilize themselves for one minute cycles, in low sec (where the L5's are)? In a multi-billion ISK ship, that has minimal defences against super-fast interceptors?
You do realize that 1 Keres and 1 Sentinel will now be able to pin down a Marauder that is running solo in low sec? Both the Keres and Sentinel will lock the Marauder long before it locks them. The Keres will damp the range of the Marauder, the sentinel will start neuting it, and both will kill the first 5 small drones that might be on the field. Any subsequent flights of drones sent out by the Marauder will not attack, because the Marauder has no lock, and that's that.
The Marauder is pinned down, until heavier ships show up to kill it.
Hell, one inty will likely get under the guns, and easily speed-tank the guns because of the removal of the web bonus, while shooting any drones that can catch it.
No one will use these boats in low sec, nor wormholes, nor in high sec when at war, nor in high sec near gankers, nor ANY incursion, nor in NPC null sec, nor outside any non-secure null sec enclave.
Most people viewed Orwell's writings as a warning. The harper regime and the goons treat them as a guidebook. |
baltec1
Bat Country
8252
|
Posted - 2013.10.16 14:26:00 -
[5858] - Quote
Tragedy wrote:Any reason why the vargur has the highest mass of all these ships? Its tech 2 yeah, its still minmatar tech 2. Slightly less rust. Why is it heavier then amarr and caldari bricks?
less of it has rusted so its heavier. |
Epic Rupture
10
|
Posted - 2013.10.16 14:26:00 -
[5859] - Quote
Changes as they stand right now are pretty good. Can't really understand why there are so many incursion runners' tears here. Pirate Battleships, in terms of incursions, out class Muarders in every way pre-, and eventually, post-patch. Use the right ship. Stop being lazy and train the other battleship you need and be more help to your fleet.
In terms of PVP, it's something new and I'm excited to see it potential.
|
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
419
|
Posted - 2013.10.16 14:31:00 -
[5860] - Quote
PvE is ridiculously easy already, why are CCP making it easier? |
|
baltec1
Bat Country
8252
|
Posted - 2013.10.16 14:31:00 -
[5861] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Do you seriously think that people will immobilize themselves for one minute cycles, in low sec (where the L5's are)? In a multi-billion ISK ship, that has minimal defences against super-fast interceptors?
People used to drop titans in level 5s and null anoms before the tracking nerf. They still drop supers in null anoms.
Yes people will use these ships. |
baltec1
Bat Country
8252
|
Posted - 2013.10.16 14:32:00 -
[5862] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:PvE is ridiculously easy already, why are CCP making it easier?
The changes are geared towards PvP. PvE gets buffed as a side effect. |
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
1345
|
Posted - 2013.10.16 14:32:00 -
[5863] - Quote
Epic Rupture wrote:Changes as they stand right now are pretty good. Can't really understand why there are so many incursion runners' tears here. Pirate Battleships, in terms of incursions, out class Muarders in every way pre-, and eventually, post-patch. Use the right ship. Stop being lazy and train the other battleship you need and be more helpful to your fleet.
In terms of PVP, it's something new and I'm excited to see it potential.
Sigh....you might want to re-examine your post.
1. Paladin's wipe the floor for any other armour set up, and many shield setups. 2. Marauder pilots have ALL the skills that a pirate BS pilots has, and then some. The pre-req's demand it. 3. Let's see how much you are gloating when pirate BS's are "rebalanced". Most people viewed Orwell's writings as a warning. The harper regime and the goons treat them as a guidebook. |
Xequecal
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
102
|
Posted - 2013.10.16 14:32:00 -
[5864] - Quote
The real problem with Marauders in incursions is if you're going to use them for Incursions, you have to have a fleet full of them. Pirate BSes and Marauders don't mix, the Pirate BS need remote reps and the Marauders don't. The main attraction of bringing Marauders is you can ditch all your logi pilots and increase DPS because all your ships can local tank full aggro. If you need webs, you can just have one or two dedicated webbing ships and have the Marauders remote rep them. Unlike say a Mach the web ship doesn't need to fly around everywhere so it can stay close in, in RR range.
The odds of being able to put together an Incursion fleet of Marauders are pretty thin, especially if you want all of the same type. Not a lot of people have AWU V, BS V, and T2 large guns trained. |
The Djego
Hellequin Inc. Mean Coalition
196
|
Posted - 2013.10.16 14:33:00 -
[5865] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:The Djego wrote:Joe Risalo wrote:I don't get what all the QQ is about on the overtanking.
People complain about the overtank - The overtank is intended to allow them to perform in other areas where more tank is required. Yes, they overtank lvl 4 missions. However, they're designed for pve, so why wouldn't they be able to overtank lvl 4's? They overtank because their tank is designed for much larger engagements. The fact that these ships can aggro an entire room without worrying about aggroes/triggers means that they do indeed clear rooms faster. When you're watching aggroes/triggers, you're actually going slower.
It is called being lazy, not paying attention, being unable to figure out the pve mechanics and want pve as brain afk as possible. It has nothing to do with doing pve effective or even remotely fast. Nobody that can do this would fit a 1k dps active tank on the hull since it is a utterly wast of slots and time, because you only need it if you are slow, not paying attention and ignoring the mechanics. It doesn't work that way in Marauders... Their uber tank requires attention, you down targets in 1-5 volleys, and you have to MJD away to reduce tracking at times. The uber tank allows these ships to be able to do things they could do before. WH pve, lvl 5 missions... Of all the ships in Eve, Marauders should be allowed to solo lvl 5's. If this means they overtank lvl 4's... That's completely fair.
A uber tank requires zero attention, that is the reason why people fit a uber tank in the first place. They can do WH and L5 with them atm to the problem is just that you need to utilize RR(what marauders can do very well).
As a hint, dangers for pve in L5 and WH is very trivial(it is very predictable, if you have to you can find a guide on how to do something in a few seconds using goggle) compared getting ganked by other players and this is actually the biggest problem to people that don't pay attention. Improve discharge rigging: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=246166&find=unread
|
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
1345
|
Posted - 2013.10.16 14:36:00 -
[5866] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Do you seriously think that people will immobilize themselves for one minute cycles, in low sec (where the L5's are)? In a multi-billion ISK ship, that has minimal defences against super-fast interceptors?
People used to drop titans in level 5s and null anoms before the tracking nerf. They still drop supers in null anoms. Yes people will use these ships.
Wow, you are a one-man propaganda team. I would drop a Nyx into an anom too, if I was living in goon space, with intel channels telling me what is happening 20 jumps out, and I was far out of jump range of any hot drop.
But of course, in NPC null, that tactic of dropping a Nyx into an anom would be something that gets pilots kicked from corps. Most people viewed Orwell's writings as a warning. The harper regime and the goons treat them as a guidebook. |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
1350
|
Posted - 2013.10.16 14:36:00 -
[5867] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Octoven wrote:To be quite frank I agree with Dinsdale here, you truly do not understand incursion mechanics, Im not sure if I am surprised or sad that a dev would make such a ludicrous statement. I would love to see how your internal testing can slow a tama down doing 3500 m/s without webs, more importantly I would love to see how your guns track that. You may as well throw them at the tamas for all the damn good they do. It certainly would cause more DPS than shooting them. Drones are your only source of DPS.
Furthermore your non-nonchalant attitude toward to needing logistics in incursions is even more of an insane statement. You do realize that said logistics provide tracking links which you cant receive because your in bloody bastion mode. I think you should re-evaluate your statement and start listening to player feedback instead of your own assumptions.
Finally I would argue with you that taking webs away to not cater to a specific group of individuals (inc runners) to turn the ship into specialized **** for only a small group of people is only shifting WHO you are indeed catering too and to be honest that bit I do find rather offensive. I would expect better knowledge of game mechanics from a dev and certainly a better sense of be quite respectable to your player base. If we weren't listening to player feedback, we wouldn't have modified the hulls to un-nerf them, or haven't spent the time to read through this thread or discussed Marauders for hours with the other Devs. We do respect your opinion, but Devs cannot please everyone in the community when rebalancing things in a live MMO. That's just the sad truth that we have to live with. Now, we are not saying we are guaranteed 100% future-proof right regarding the previous statement. We said internal play testing showed us there were other ways for them in Incursions - we are willing to keep an open mind and openly admit we were wrong if those aren't used at all in Incursions when they go live. After all, we have been wrong before. If the previous post was deemed offensive to the Incursion community, we do apologize and will tweak it in consequence. However, if they need to be further tweaked for Incursions, it will be after we can see some more hard live data on how they actually fare.
field command resist profile and make the bastion like a dcuii that way you can do rr if you want or solo tank if thats how you play... remember options are a good thing.
There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... Winter Expansion new ship request |
baltec1
Bat Country
8253
|
Posted - 2013.10.16 14:38:00 -
[5868] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:baltec1 wrote:Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Do you seriously think that people will immobilize themselves for one minute cycles, in low sec (where the L5's are)? In a multi-billion ISK ship, that has minimal defences against super-fast interceptors?
People used to drop titans in level 5s and null anoms before the tracking nerf. They still drop supers in null anoms. Yes people will use these ships. Wow, you are a one-man propaganda team. I would drop a Nyx into an anom too, if I was living in goon space, with intel channels telling me what is happening 20 jumps out, and I was far out of jump range of any hot drop. But of course, in NPC null, that tactic of dropping a Nyx into an anom would be something that gets pilots kicked from corps.
Actually we dont do this because carrier ratting is dumb. Nyx ratting is a Russian thing. |
|
CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
2864
|
Posted - 2013.10.16 14:38:00 -
[5869] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:Also Ytterbium -have you considered replacing TP bonus on golem for an explosion radius bonus???
Ah yes, forgot to address that in the previous post .
Yes, we did - it all comes down to this:
- TP bonus:
+ More than one can be added, allowing to give more benefit than the explosion radius bonus. Especially useful due to the Bastion module that frees med slots. + Target painting affects a whole group of players - Require med slots in the first place
- Explosion radius bonus:
+ Doesn't require med slot in the first place + Always applied as long as you shoot - Static, cannot be influenced by itself - Doesn't affect other players
So far, we prefer the TP bonus - but that's debatable. The other Marauders don't rely on specific tackling / EW modules anymore (web bonus removed), thus it could make sense to remove it as well. |
|
hmskrecik
TransMine Group German Information Network Alliance
115
|
Posted - 2013.10.16 14:39:00 -
[5870] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:hmskrecik wrote:Silent Cyborg wrote:do you not think seen as this forum thread is sooo long that you might be pissing off too many players and you might be wrong and should stop and re-evaluate the changes. Muarders are a good ship with the web bonuse for all roles in game, losing it is just going to kill the ship. who is going to pvp with a ship that can not defend itself. not even to a t1 frig with a scram. Not exactly. As a mission runner I can tell you that I don't use webs on my Kronos, whether it's Railguns or Blasters fit. There are just better uses for that mid slot and I'll gladly trade this bonus for those coming with Rubicon. And the length of the thread indicates only that so many people have strong, if contradictory, opinions of this ship class. Or rather, that some people are such opinionated. This way or another, it means that ANY balance update will **** someone. The thread is long because its getting on for two months old. True dat. However if my memory serves me right, it has been upgraded to threadnaught since day one. |
|
Arthur Aihaken
The.VOID
329
|
Posted - 2013.10.16 14:39:00 -
[5871] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Alright, as promised, we are having a small iteration on the hulls themselves: I think you guys got Marauders right this time (!!) These were never intended as short-range platforms, so I'm glad to see the web bonuses replaced by ones more applicable to their role. Even though they don't have full T2 resists, the enhanced resists, additional speed and hull buffs are welcome changes. KUDOS (!!)
(now if we could just change the color, hint, hint...) I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
Octoven
Phoenix Productions Headshot Gaming
187
|
Posted - 2013.10.16 14:40:00 -
[5872] - Quote
Epic Rupture wrote:Changes as they stand right now are pretty good. Can't really understand why there are so many incursion runners' tears here. Pirate Battleships, in terms of incursions, out class Muarders in every way pre-, and eventually, post-patch. Use the right ship. Stop being lazy and train the other battleship you need and be more helpful to your fleet.
In terms of PVP, it's something new and I'm excited to see it potential.
You sir clearly do not understand a thing about incs and probably don't even run them |
Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
562
|
Posted - 2013.10.16 14:41:00 -
[5873] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Harvey James wrote:Also Ytterbium -have you considered replacing TP bonus on golem for an explosion radius bonus???
Ah yes, forgot to address that in the previous post . Yes, we did - it all comes down to this:
- TP bonus:
+ More than one can be added, allowing to give more benefit than the explosion radius bonus. Especially useful due to the Bastion module that frees med slots. + Target painting affects a whole group of players - Require med slots in the first place
- Explosion radius bonus:
+ Doesn't require med slot in the first place + Always applied as long as you shoot - Static, cannot be influenced by itself - Doesn't affect other players
So far, we prefer the TP bonus - but that's debatable. The other Marauders don't rely on specific tackling / EW modules anymore (web bonus removed), thus it could make sense to remove it as well.
it would make sense you can't favour 1 out 4 ships ... besides they can still use a unbonused TP to great effect but at least its not compulsory like it is atm.. Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |
Silent Cyborg
WIFI Express TAXU
1
|
Posted - 2013.10.16 14:44:00 -
[5874] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Harvey James wrote:Also Ytterbium -have you considered replacing TP bonus on golem for an explosion radius bonus???
Ah yes, forgot to address that in the previous post . Yes, we did - it all comes down to this:
- TP bonus:
+ More than one can be added, allowing to give more benefit than the explosion radius bonus. Especially useful due to the Bastion module that frees med slots. + Target painting affects a whole group of players - Require med slots in the first place
- Explosion radius bonus:
+ Doesn't require med slot in the first place + Always applied as long as you shoot - Static, cannot be influenced by itself - Doesn't affect other players
So far, we prefer the TP bonus - but that's debatable. The other Marauders don't rely on specific tackling / EW modules anymore (web bonus removed), thus it could make sense to remove it as well.
I wonder Why is there no CSM approving and or voicing parse for these changes??? |
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
1347
|
Posted - 2013.10.16 14:44:00 -
[5875] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Harvey James wrote:Also Ytterbium -have you considered replacing TP bonus on golem for an explosion radius bonus???
Ah yes, forgot to address that in the previous post . Yes, we did - it all comes down to this:
- TP bonus:
+ More than one can be added, allowing to give more benefit than the explosion radius bonus. Especially useful due to the Bastion module that frees med slots. + Target painting affects a whole group of players - Require med slots in the first place
- Explosion radius bonus:
+ Doesn't require med slot in the first place + Always applied as long as you shoot - Static, cannot be influenced by itself - Doesn't affect other players
So far, we prefer the TP bonus - but that's debatable. The other Marauders don't rely on specific tackling / EW modules anymore (web bonus removed), thus it could make sense to remove it as well.
Look, maybe you have some kind of difficulty with math. You are NOT freeing up mid slots. You are TAKING THEM AWAY on Marauders.
Every word you type states clearly that we must use the MjD to get the full effect of the ship. That is one mid slot. And you NEED at least one more mid slot for cap recharging when using an active tank. Yes, I have tested this on Sisi and it is true. So that is 2 slots gone, at least, in the mids.
I would be more than happy to get onto Sisi with you, and actually test these ships. I can fly all 4. Then you can show me whatever fit you have, and let's see how it actually performs compared to the ship today on TQ. Most people viewed Orwell's writings as a warning. The harper regime and the goons treat them as a guidebook. |
Arthur Aihaken
The.VOID
329
|
Posted - 2013.10.16 14:44:00 -
[5876] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
- TP bonus:
+ More than one can be added, allowing to give more benefit than the explosion radius bonus. Especially useful due to the Bastion module that frees med slots. + Target painting affects a whole group of players - Require med slots in the first place
- Explosion radius bonus:
+ Doesn't require med slot in the first place + Always applied as long as you shoot - Static, cannot be influenced by itself - Doesn't affect other players
So far, we prefer the TP bonus - but that's debatable. The other Marauders don't rely on specific tackling / EW modules anymore (web bonus removed), thus it could make sense to remove it as well. How about a +5% rate of fire for the Golem instead? Paladin gets a +5% damage bonus, Kronos gets a +5% damage bonus and Vargur gets a +5% rate of fire. The RNI still fills a role of applying damage more effectively (explosion radius bonus) and the SNI still benefits from a larger tank and increased shield resists. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
baltec1
Bat Country
8253
|
Posted - 2013.10.16 14:45:00 -
[5877] - Quote
hmskrecik wrote: True dat. However if my memory serves me right, it has been upgraded to threadnaught since day one.
Most of it is just paper craft. The testing didn't start till the other week and most of the negative replies are from people who either have not tested them or want them to be like the pirate battleships. |
luredivino
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
27
|
Posted - 2013.10.16 14:48:00 -
[5878] - Quote
They still have a massive drawback....Pirate battleships. Why would you pay a billion isk and have such a heavy skill investment for something that isn't as good as pirate battleships for the given role. They either need to be cheaper, or the skill investment needs to be reduced. There would have to be a massive nerf to the damage pirate battleships can do in order to make them worth using. You can't even use these ships in low or null security space because of the high chance one of the new interceptors will tackle them before they even come out of bastion, much less warp out. These will see the same limited use after the novelty of bastion wears off as they saw before....You don't need more tank for level 4s and they still can't run level 5s because of energy neutralizors and the high chance of death that comes from using them in low security. |
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
1347
|
Posted - 2013.10.16 14:48:00 -
[5879] - Quote
Silent Cyborg wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:Harvey James wrote:Also Ytterbium -have you considered replacing TP bonus on golem for an explosion radius bonus???
Ah yes, forgot to address that in the previous post . Yes, we did - it all comes down to this:
- TP bonus:
+ More than one can be added, allowing to give more benefit than the explosion radius bonus. Especially useful due to the Bastion module that frees med slots. + Target painting affects a whole group of players - Require med slots in the first place
- Explosion radius bonus:
+ Doesn't require med slot in the first place + Always applied as long as you shoot - Static, cannot be influenced by itself - Doesn't affect other players
So far, we prefer the TP bonus - but that's debatable. The other Marauders don't rely on specific tackling / EW modules anymore (web bonus removed), thus it could make sense to remove it as well. \I wonder Why is there no CSM approving and or voicing parse for these changes???
Pretty simple answer on that one. CSM is dominated by the null sec cartels, sprinkled with a couple wh players. Neither group had much interest on the Marauder class before, and certainly won't have any interest in them now. Of course, unless you live in a completely secure null sec enclave. Most people viewed Orwell's writings as a warning. The harper regime and the goons treat them as a guidebook. |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
587
|
Posted - 2013.10.16 14:50:00 -
[5880] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Harvey James wrote:Also Ytterbium -have you considered replacing TP bonus on golem for an explosion radius bonus???
Ah yes, forgot to address that in the previous post . Yes, we did - it all comes down to this:
- TP bonus:
+ More than one can be added, allowing to give more benefit than the explosion radius bonus. Especially useful due to the Bastion module that frees med slots. + Target painting affects a whole group of players - Require med slots in the first place
- Explosion radius bonus:
+ Doesn't require med slot in the first place + Always applied as long as you shoot - Static, cannot be influenced by itself - Doesn't affect other players
So far, we prefer the TP bonus - but that's debatable. The other Marauders don't rely on specific tackling / EW modules anymore (web bonus removed), thus it could make sense to remove it as well.
has CCP spoken about cap warfare immunity?
This is a major weak point of Marauders.
Is it intended, or since they can't receive reps/cap, are y'all considering cap warfare immunity? |
|
|
|
|
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 |