| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 .. 16 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |

Arthur Aihaken
The.VOID
85
|
Posted - 2013.07.26 12:34:00 -
[361] - Quote
Naomi Knight wrote:give them 50% reduction in Signature Radius Penalty from Microwarp Drives role bonus if it worked for AF-s then they should work for marauders too :)
Except for the size the Marauders are, it won't really matter. Now a -10% MWD capacitor activation reduction per level... |

Daniel Plain
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
1307
|
Posted - 2013.07.26 14:12:00 -
[362] - Quote
Mole Guy wrote:General Guardian wrote:Well half of the thread made for an interesting read. Didn't read the other half  I think we should give marauders the 3rd rig slot, and incorporate sub system technology in to them. Turn them in to strategic battleships. Oh that would be fun and justify the training time if i werent trying to keep this post and my name clean i would bring out my cussing sailor side. stay the hell away from me with that t3 crap. we need to purge them from game not bring in more. i dont care about how usefull they are or what u prefer...make a t3 bs in eve 2.0, but stay away from my marauders... frankly, i agree. as much as i love my tengu and loki, they are not necessarily a good addition to the game overall.
also, a cruiser can perform in many roles and with all the current subsystems T3s are covering (read: dominating) most of them. a battleship on the other hand is meant for, well, battle. how many meaningful choices can you possibly bake into battleship subsystems?
"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings" -MXZF |

Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc Ex Cinere Scriptor
2154
|
Posted - 2013.07.26 14:23:00 -
[363] - Quote
Daniel Plain wrote:Mole Guy wrote:if i werent trying to keep this post and my name clean i would bring out my cussing sailor side.
stay the hell away from me with that t3 crap. we need to purge them from game not bring in more. i dont care about how usefull they are or what u prefer...make a t3 bs in eve 2.0, but stay away from my marauders... frankly, i agree. as much as i love my tengu and loki, they are not necessarily a good addition to the game overall. also, a cruiser can perform in many roles and with all the current subsystems T3s are covering (read: dominating) most of them. a battleship on the other hand is meant for, well, battle. how many meaningful choices can you possibly bake into battleship subsystems? I agree with this.
That being said, I believe these ships seriously need a hook.
Tanking and DPS have been done to death, and are not special. They are expected in any ship called a battleship.
This is called a Marauder. The concept behind the name deserves recognition. A raiding ship, designed to operate with or without fleet support. Any ship can work well with numbers, this one should be also functional as a threat without numbers.
What special ability can you give the ship, that is not already done to death by the T1 or faction hulls already? The Black Ops, for example, is hardly a completed concept, but it has a distinctive role that justifies it's existence as a T2 BS hull. No pirate or navy hull duplicates this class.
The Marauder should have something comparable to that. Cloaking being on a ten minute manual cycle timer? (Author: Bree Okanata) Fine. As long as there is a ten minute timer for being docked in a station. Also, you can't stop moving in the game. Just add in a way so every ten minutes you are randomly warped to the nearest other player. Keeps people from going AFK. |

Daniel Plain
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
1308
|
Posted - 2013.07.26 15:28:00 -
[364] - Quote
Nikk Narrel wrote:Daniel Plain wrote:Mole Guy wrote:if i werent trying to keep this post and my name clean i would bring out my cussing sailor side.
stay the hell away from me with that t3 crap. we need to purge them from game not bring in more. i dont care about how usefull they are or what u prefer...make a t3 bs in eve 2.0, but stay away from my marauders... frankly, i agree. as much as i love my tengu and loki, they are not necessarily a good addition to the game overall. also, a cruiser can perform in many roles and with all the current subsystems T3s are covering (read: dominating) most of them. a battleship on the other hand is meant for, well, battle. how many meaningful choices can you possibly bake into battleship subsystems? I agree with this. That being said, I believe these ships seriously need a hook. Tanking and DPS have been done to death, and are not special. They are expected in any ship called a battleship. This is called a Marauder. The concept behind the name deserves recognition. A raiding ship, designed to operate with or without fleet support. Any ship can work well with numbers, this one should be also functional as a threat without numbers. What special ability can you give the ship, that is not already done to death by the T1 or faction hulls already? The Black Ops, for example, is hardly a completed concept, but it has a distinctive role that justifies it's existence as a T2 BS hull. No pirate or navy hull duplicates this class. The Marauder should have something comparable to that.
well, they are 'marauding' mission NPCs pretty well... as far as new flavor goes, i liked the once per day jump drive idea as well as a few others in this thread. i can throw in another few, like higher and more homogenous resistance profiles but i'm not sure if this is relevant at this point. i guess we'll have to trust in fozzie's balancing skills and see where we land.
"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings" -MXZF |

Caleb Seremshur
Angel of War Whores in space
27
|
Posted - 2013.07.26 18:29:00 -
[365] - Quote
Well we have all those "prototype" inferno modules to work with here that are BS only
Target spectrum breaker MJD Reactive armour hardeners Ancillary shield booster Ancillary armour repairer
On that basis let's use them on a racial level
Vargur: -5% duration and cooldown for MJD per level Kronos: -5% repair paste consumed per cycle per level Golem: +10% ASB capacity per level (more charges) Paladin: -5% capacitor use and cycle time, +1%/level resistance bonus to reactive armour hardener
Vargur becomes more mobile, kronos tanks longer, golem tanks longer, paladin gets tougher.
Perhaps allow marauders to fit bomb launchers? More agile? Slightly faster? -50% sig bloom with MWD running definitely Scan res not lower than 150 natively. It's awful hard to maraude without being able to lock anything quickly.
I do not support any native HP bonuses or resist bonuses or DPS increases for these ships. It's more important to me to make them more viable for use outside of L4's than it is to give them bigger numbers and cross thine fingers. |

MyNameIs Max
Black Aces Against ALL Authorities
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.26 18:36:00 -
[366] - Quote
Caleb Seremshur wrote:Well we have all those "prototype" inferno modules to work with here that are BS only
Target spectrum breaker MJD Reactive armour hardeners Ancillary shield booster Ancillary armour repairer
the reactive hardener, the ancillary shield boosters and armor repairers are not BS only. |

Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc Ex Cinere Scriptor
2155
|
Posted - 2013.07.26 18:48:00 -
[367] - Quote
Caleb Seremshur wrote:Well we have all those "prototype" inferno modules to work with here that are BS only
Target spectrum breaker MJD Reactive armour hardeners Ancillary shield booster Ancillary armour repairer
On that basis let's use them on a racial level
Vargur: -5% duration and cooldown for MJD per level Kronos: -5% repair paste consumed per cycle per level Golem: +10% ASB capacity per level (more charges) Paladin: -5% capacitor use and cycle time, +1%/level resistance bonus to reactive armour hardener
Vargur becomes more mobile, kronos tanks longer, golem tanks longer, paladin gets tougher. Not so much support for this, it just stretches tanking or racial, which for a battleship is expected.
I want to see the specialization T2 is supposed to represent.
Caleb Seremshur wrote:Perhaps allow marauders to fit bomb launchers?
BINGO. Make the Marauder into a weapon that defines a class of it's own.
I would recommend being able to launch more than a single bomb here, since this is neither a frigate nor does it feature cloaking ability.
Caleb Seremshur wrote:More agile? Slightly faster? -50% sig bloom with MWD running definitely Scan res not lower than 150 natively. It's awful hard to maraude without being able to lock anything quickly.
I do not support any native HP bonuses or resist bonuses or DPS increases for these ships. It's more important to me to make them more viable for use outside of L4's than it is to give them bigger numbers and cross thine fingers.
This part is more details, the hook is the bomb launcher. Not bad, Caleb Seremshur! Cloaking being on a ten minute manual cycle timer? (Author: Bree Okanata) Fine. As long as there is a ten minute timer for being docked in a station. Also, you can't stop moving in the game. Just add in a way so every ten minutes you are randomly warped to the nearest other player. Keeps people from going AFK. |

Mole Guy
Xoth Inc Pandorum Invictus
279
|
Posted - 2013.07.26 20:02:00 -
[368] - Quote
bomb launcher, huh? odd. what does it maraud? how can you raid with a bomb launcher?
really well actually. let it have 3 launchers plus its weapons system... expensive ass bomber. throw it behind enemy lines to break things up. 2-3 of these can wreak havoc. and they arent something one would easily discard. just thow away a bill isk?
im not a fan of the idea, but it would be unique and thats what marauders need.
i still like the more balanced resistance platform (one never knows who they might encounter), the mjd reduction in cycle time. posible 10% per lev. we do not need a sig reduction...its already a battleship. everyone hits it. a burner bonus would rawk tho. maybe 10% to burner speed like t3. this would help in moving around and dodging SOME damage.
i love running a burner on my paladin.
a jump drive would be the shyt tho. maybe not what a blops receives, but descent range +/-.
|

Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc Ex Cinere Scriptor
2159
|
Posted - 2013.07.27 22:28:00 -
[369] - Quote
Mole Guy wrote:what about an AOE web? give it the same range and restrictions as a dictor...immobile, huge sig, no rr... >=) How about we make a bomb version of the Warp Disrupt Probes?
Flies same distance as a regular bomb, then opens up exactly like the current Warp Disrupt Probe.
Only fired by the Marauder's bomb launchers, not the regular bombers unless they want to expand their roles too. Cloaking being on a ten minute manual cycle timer? (Author: Bree Okanata) Fine. As long as there is a ten minute timer for being docked in a station. Also, you can't stop moving in the game. Just add in a way so every ten minutes you are randomly warped to the nearest other player. Keeps people from going AFK. |

stoicfaux
2977
|
Posted - 2013.07.27 23:20:00 -
[370] - Quote
Marauder role bonus: * doesn't show up on local, * very difficult to scan down (i.e. isn't identified as a ship via probes until scan strength is very high)
This would make Marauders marauders in terms of PvP, and would encourage the use of Marauders for non-high-sec PvE.)
|

Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc Ex Cinere Scriptor
2160
|
Posted - 2013.07.28 00:06:00 -
[371] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:Marauder role bonus: * doesn't show up on local, * very difficult to scan down (i.e. isn't identified as a ship via probes until scan strength is very high)
This would make Marauders marauders in terms of PvP, and would encourage the use of Marauders for non-high-sec PvE.)
With irony, it would make them more hidden than a covops too. Cloaking being on a ten minute manual cycle timer? (Author: Bree Okanata) Fine. As long as there is a ten minute timer for being docked in a station. Also, you can't stop moving in the game. Just add in a way so every ten minutes you are randomly warped to the nearest other player. Keeps people from going AFK. |

Fredric Wolf
BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team
15
|
Posted - 2013.07.28 03:23:00 -
[372] - Quote
Here is an Idea give them a role of 75% reduction to mass for bridging from blops cover jump portal generators. Allow these ships to use covert cyno bridging. Do not give these ships cloaks but these ships being able to bridge into cyno jammed systems would allow these ships to operate behind enemy lines and cause much destruction. |

Daisai
Daisai Investments.
123
|
Posted - 2013.07.28 14:18:00 -
[373] - Quote
As long as there is a maurader with drone dps, to at least give players an option who like to use drones for dps. |

Caleb Seremshur
Angel of War Whores in space
31
|
Posted - 2013.07.28 18:05:00 -
[374] - Quote
Just spent the last several hours using bombers on SISI. Bombs are definitely staying at the top of my list of recommended changes. They're not as strong as people claim especially seeing as you'll have to manually aim your big dumb battleship to hit anything. |

Daisai
Daisai Investments.
123
|
Posted - 2013.07.28 19:08:00 -
[375] - Quote
Caleb Seremshur wrote:Just spent the last several hours using bombers on SISI. Bombs are definitely staying at the top of my list of recommended changes. They're not as strong as people claim especially seeing as you'll have to manually aim your big dumb battleship to hit anything.
You're kidding right? A good bombing run can completely destroy a complete fleet in matter of seconds and also take their pods, that sounds pretty strong to me.
How would you suggest changing it though and why ? |

Caleb Seremshur
Angel of War Whores in space
31
|
Posted - 2013.07.28 19:44:00 -
[376] - Quote
These are billion isk marauders, not 20 million isk bombers. They are slow and have poor agility. They have only about 30k ehp natively, lower than navy vessels. They have weak sensor strength.
The list goes on
It would not be an ISK efficient way of waging war not to mention that getting so close as to use the bombs puts them in neuting range which would shut their tanks off.
All the naysayers are just looking at DPS output and disregarding the idea off the bat instead of sitting down and thinking critically about the pros and cons.
What does a marauder with 3 bomb launchers gain? 3 full volleys worth of firepower in a direction that may not necessarily be helpful, to pre-set distance which might be too far or too short, which takes 120 seconds to recharge. |

Caleb Seremshur
Angel of War Whores in space
33
|
Posted - 2013.07.29 05:29:00 -
[377] - Quote
As an addendum to my above post, to answer your question in a way that would make them potentially game-breakingly OP
Marauder:
May fit 3 bomb launchers +5% racial damage to bombs per level +10% warp jammer range per level.
Those two simple additions would be potentially game breaking for them. 24k per 3 bombs AND 36km point. But without the point bonus what do you have? If the target has any reasonable degree of speed they should be able to outrun the damage if they see you lining up for a bombing run. Really this proposal would affect gatecamps and miners/mission runners the most.
Ergo
Kronos:
8,4,7
Gallente Battleship Skill Bonus: 5% bonus to large hybrid weapon damage and 10% bonus to the velocity factor of stasis webifiers per level
Marauder Skill Bonus: 7.5% bonus to repair amount of armor repair systems and 7.5% bonus to large hybrid weapon tracking per level
Role Bonus: 100% bonus to large hybrid weapon damage, 100% bonus to range and velocity of tractor beams, May fit 3 bomb launchers, +5% racial damage to bombs per level, +10% warp jammer range per level.
Now you add functionality. Do you fly a bombing battleship that fits a cloak and a couple of bomb launchers and hit enemy miners? Do you fit all 3 bombs and a probe and nail mission runners? Or do you carry on like before and do missions/ratting - bearing in mind IIRC there are no missions in nullsec aside from NPC space which would be crazy dangerous for a lone battleship, triple bombs or no. Bombs can't be used in lowsec (unfortunately) so it would still be a nullsec only device.
You asked me a question and now I ask you in a similar vain: can you actually tell me how adding bombs (without consideration to role bonuses or any other 'new' things) would be game breaking for marauders? |

Arthur Aihaken
The.VOID
85
|
Posted - 2013.07.29 08:05:00 -
[378] - Quote
Forget bombs. What we really need are remote-detonated MINES. |

Caleb Seremshur
Angel of War Whores in space
33
|
Posted - 2013.07.29 08:47:00 -
[379] - Quote
I'm pretty sure the issue with mines is a server-side performance thing. They did used to exist, they're apparently unfeasible from a technical viewpoint. |

Alticus C Bear
University of Caille Gallente Federation
161
|
Posted - 2013.07.29 09:12:00 -
[380] - Quote
Generally making sensor and combat tweaks is probably enough although T1 battleships are much closer in power now.
For unique abilities
Can fit Micro Jump Drive overdrive script (there is probably a better name)
Can then use Micro jump drive to jump between systems locking onto gates in the target system rather than a cyno and appears through the gate triggering the normal gate affects including gate cloak.
Has a limited Ly jump range.
Use has larger cool down than usual, say 10 minutes.
Not useable in Highsec and cannot jump to Highsec gates.
Allows those performing PVE/PVP better mobility around lowsec/ null sec.
Allows Marauder gangs to jump past gate camps and assault them from the other side.
Have used the micro jump drive to jump makes them temporarily more vulnerable without that module for a period.
Does not require cyno ship or jump drive skills. |

Arthur Aihaken
The.VOID
85
|
Posted - 2013.07.29 10:53:00 -
[381] - Quote
Caleb Seremshur wrote:I'm pretty sure the issue with mines is a server-side performance thing. They did used to exist, they're apparently unfeasible from a technical viewpoint.
That's why I suggested remote-detonated only, ie: one mine deployed per launcher. But here's another suggestion for Marauders: increase the Target Breaker strength by 100% per Marauder level. |

The Djego
Hellequin Inc. Mean Coalition
136
|
Posted - 2013.07.29 11:55:00 -
[382] - Quote
My personal impressions with the ship class, plus some more conventional stuff I would like to see:
http://failheap-challenge.com/showthread.php?13247-Marauders
Improve discharge rigging: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=246166&find=unread
|

Arthur Aihaken
The.VOID
85
|
Posted - 2013.07.29 13:01:00 -
[383] - Quote
Maybe now that assault cruisers are almost finished... Marauders might be next? (hint, hint) |

Gabriel Karade
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
115
|
Posted - 2013.07.31 17:33:00 -
[384] - Quote
Suspense is killing!... MOAR INFO!

Gallente MkII: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1227770 War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293 |

big miker
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
29
|
Posted - 2013.07.31 18:31:00 -
[385] - Quote
My idea about maruaders?
Pretty simple. Give them an RR BS role. This consists of 2 new kind of bonus's.
The new bonus's will change too for example the kronos:
Gallente Battleship skill bonus: 5 % bonus to large hybrid weapon damage and 10% bonus to the velocity factor of stasis webifiers per level.
Marauder skill bonus: 7.5% bonus to repair amount of armor repair systems and armor remote repair systems , and 7.5 % bonus to large hybrid weapon tracking per level.
Role bonus: 100% to large hybride weapon damage, 100% bonus to range and velocity of tractor beams and 100 % bonus to armor remote repair systems range.
This will pretty much buff a Large 'solace' remote armor repairer to the next stats:
Armor HP repaired: 384 -> 528 Optimal range: 8400m -> 16,800m
Increase sensor strenghte and grid a tiny bit and that's it. This will make them extremely good as a RR BS composition. The range isn't extreme and the rep amount per remote repairer isn't extreme either. The shield remote repair variants require a large amount of CPU. A small tweak or bonus would be needed for those, becuase buffing up the golems or vargurs CPU wouldn't be a smart idea. They'd be able to fit multiple ASB's without fitting issues which shouldn't be happening.
Tell me what you think, it's just a random idea I was thinking about  |

stoicfaux
3035
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 19:01:00 -
[386] - Quote
Well, given that CCP is overhauling warfare links, and Marauders have utility high slots...
|

Abused Slave
Adventurers
4
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 19:11:00 -
[387] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:Well, given that CCP is overhauling warfare links, and Marauders have utility high slots...
Hmm, I think that would actualy be a nice idea. But I'm more a fan of the bomb idea xD Would be fun as hell. |

Caleb Seremshur
Angel of War
35
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 20:47:00 -
[388] - Quote
unless marauders gained 5% bonuses to links where would the incentive to fly one over a command ship or T3 be present? that's also before considering that command ships I think take even longer to train in to than marauders...
I think that the discussions on marauders have pretty much come full circle. the RR bonus proposal has surfaced again. this is not a niche that needs filling I think. there are t2 logi ships for this or even umder the current stats you can use the high slots for remote energy transfer to generate free cap for the local repa to consume.
I really feel that a bomb launcher is the best thing for marauders in the effort to push them out of highsec and in to null. instead of 100% range bonus for tractor beams you get 100% bonus for bomb range. things like this add more value because theres less overlap with other ships unlike rr where there's already ways to do it Read my thread here for my thoughts on eve economy https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=263968&find=unread Mining in game, from the perspective of an IRL miner. |

Mole Guy
Xoth Inc Pandorum Invictus
299
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 23:02:00 -
[389] - Quote
Caleb Seremshur wrote:unless marauders gained 5% bonuses to links where would the incentive to fly one over a command ship or T3 be present? that's also before considering that command ships I think take even longer to train in to than marauders...
I think that the discussions on marauders have pretty much come full circle. the RR bonus proposal has surfaced again. this is not a niche that needs filling I think. there are t2 logi ships for this or even umder the current stats you can use the high slots for remote energy transfer to generate free cap for the local repa to consume.
I really feel that a bomb launcher is the best thing for marauders in the effort to push them out of highsec and in to null. instead of 100% range bonus for tractor beams you get 100% bonus for bomb range. things like this add more value because theres less overlap with other ships unlike rr where there's already ways to do it well, the bomb idea was in fun
but the rr bonus would actually be best. in worm holes or deep in space, one cant always have a complete fleet laying around. having the ability to run in 2-3 person groups would be awesome. we put the rr bonus suggestion in several threads, its nothing new. but it would make the marauder SO much more useful. give it a 10% range and a 5% amount bonus per level or something.
plus a sensor str bonus and a few other tweaks. |

Endeavour Starfleet
913
|
Posted - 2013.08.02 01:49:00 -
[390] - Quote
Just want to say again that the Golem needs to be rebalanced into a high tank, low dps, ship designed to attract NPC attention for use in PVE content. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 .. 16 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |