Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 30 post(s) |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
73
|
Posted - 2013.08.29 20:25:00 -
[1] - Quote
O.o
*loginforchangingmyentireskillplan* |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
75
|
Posted - 2013.08.30 10:36:00 -
[2] - Quote
Tobias Hareka wrote:Random Woman wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:The new skill is needed because the Tactical Reconfiguration one gives a fuel reduction to Strontium Clathrates. I'm pretty sure you guys don't want to overflow your cargo with those  Someone wants to say hallo: click meI think you manage just fine without a new skill and without strontium. Try at least to put some effort in those excuses. Or be honest: "We put a new 8x Skill in, because we can." , is a more valid reason than that strotium lie. Do you know how big strotium unit is? 3 m3. Do you really want your cargohold full of those? Reason why fuel works for Black Ops, Dreads, Carriers, Supers is that they have special fuel bay.
Not sure if beging for strontium bay or not. 
|

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
76
|
Posted - 2013.08.30 12:06:00 -
[3] - Quote
I love the Concept but i dont get it why CCP isnt give Marauders T2 Resistence but reducing bastion resistence? |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
80
|
Posted - 2013.08.30 16:34:00 -
[4] - Quote
Battle Cube wrote:Maximus Andendare wrote:CCP, I have said earlier that I think the changes are wonderful, BUT I really think you guys ought to consider Marauders as they relate to PVE platforms, and specifically with Incursions. Incursions are, I believe, the "pinnacle" of high sec PVE, and as such, Marauders should have a place there. With the Bastion module, however, I think Marauders in Incursions will be limited, because it disables the ability to receive reps.
Thus, I would suggest that perhaps you make TWO BASTION MODULES:
One Bastion variant would do the same that the current proposed Bastion module does, and the
other Bastion variant would provide bonuses that make it a competent ship in Incursions, perhaps receiving a bonus to received reps, tracking bonus, or similar.
The idea is NOT to buff Marauders into mini dreads, so I don't think that adding damage bonuses on the "Incurision-oriented Bastion Module" is right, but a tracking bonus, explosion radius/velocity or similar damage application bonus, since Incursions are always run with Logi support and are often firing at smaller targets. Both Bastion modules would render the ship immobile, but one would buff its tank and make it ewar immune and the other would buff its damage application but it would be SUSCEPTIBLE to ewar.
Having two modules would provide compelling choices for strong tank/ewar immunity/damage range VS better damage application for smaller targets. Perhaps this is where you could build in a web range/speed bonus or similar. Again, the idea is NOT to buff their damage but to provide compelling gameplay decisions that we as players love. It would also add an element of surprise to someone engaging a Marauder. OR instead of having 2 bastion modules, have 1 be the module, and give the other bonuses to the NON-Bastion mode of the ship
*cough* scripts *cough* |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
81
|
Posted - 2013.08.30 19:06:00 -
[5] - Quote
Zaxix wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:Just another quick update.
- We are removing the BASTION TRANSFORMERTHINGIEGäó SKILL, as the name was just too awesome to be released to the public (ok ok, more seriously we got the point: having to train a new rank 8 skill just for this module wasn't appealing). Instead, the bastion mode will use high energy physics 4 and energy grid upgrades 5. The former is rank 5, the later you already need to fly the class. The bastion mode cycle time will be reduced to 60s by default to compensate.
- We hear you regarding having to drop the safeties to use the bastion mode in high-sec - we're going to fix it so you don't have to drop them to use the module. However you'll still receive a weapon timer when activating it.
Adjusting OP to reflect this. EDIT: remember all of this is subject to change - training high energy physics is at your own risk if the bastion mode skill requirements change. I like this quick feedback thing. More please! swap tractor for something awesome
TARGET BREAKER!!!!!!! MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA  |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
81
|
Posted - 2013.08.30 19:30:00 -
[6] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:Just another quick update.
- We are removing the BASTION TRANSFORMERTHINGIEGäó SKILL, as the name was just too awesome to be released to the public (ok ok, more seriously we got the point: having to train a new rank 8 skill just for this module wasn't appealing). Instead, the bastion mode will use high energy physics 4 and energy grid upgrades 5. The former is rank 5, the later you already need to fly the class. The bastion mode cycle time will be reduced to 60s by default to compensate.
- We hear you regarding having to drop the safeties to use the bastion mode in high-sec - we're going to fix it so you don't have to drop them to use the module. However you'll still receive a weapon timer when activating it.
Adjusting OP to reflect this. EDIT: remember all of this is subject to change - training high energy physics is at your own risk if the bastion mode skill requirements change. I'd prefer a new skill over a carebear industry skill tbh.
Multitasking at 5 would be nice. |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
81
|
Posted - 2013.08.30 19:52:00 -
[7] - Quote
Gorn Arming wrote:These changes make very little sense.
The inability to receive remote reps while sieged means that these ships will see no use in large fleets. That hardly seems necessary on a ship that's already bonused towards active tanking with only a moderate 30% resist bonus applying towards remote reps.
Further, because this module anchors the Marauder in place for its duration, it's going to be incredibly risky (meaning not cost-effective) to use one of these in nullsec or lowsec PvE.
These Marauders seem to provide yet another reason for everyone to move their money-making characters to highsec. Is that really what we want?
I dunno if your view isnt to fleet fight centered? The changes arent meant to be for big fleet fights its still a Highend PvE Ship and they clearly stated this in the OP.
Its a welcome change after 6 years of ignoring Marauders because Pirate Ships where simply better...
|

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
82
|
Posted - 2013.08.30 20:07:00 -
[8] - Quote
Gorn Arming wrote:Lephia DeGrande wrote:Gorn Arming wrote:These changes make very little sense.
The inability to receive remote reps while sieged means that these ships will see no use in large fleets. That hardly seems necessary on a ship that's already bonused towards active tanking with only a moderate 30% resist bonus applying towards remote reps.
Further, because this module anchors the Marauder in place for its duration, it's going to be incredibly risky (meaning not cost-effective) to use one of these in nullsec or lowsec PvE.
These Marauders seem to provide yet another reason for everyone to move their money-making characters to highsec. Is that really what we want? I dunno if your view isnt to fleet fight centered? The changes arent meant to be for big fleet fights its still a Highend PvE Ship and they clearly stated this in the OP. Its a welcome change after 6 years of ignoring Marauders because Pirate Ships where simply better... Fine--we'll rule them out of fleets entirely. Why give a "high-end PvE ship" a module that will only be used in highsec PvE? Sieging your battleship in a nullsec anom will get you killed sooner or later (my bet's on sooner); doing it in highsec is nearly risk-free. The addition of tackling rats to forsaken hubs in the last update was enough to make most Goons back off from Vindicators for nullsec PvE, and the amount of time you spend while tackled by rats in a Vindicator is far less than the amount you'll spend tackling yourself if you fire up one of these Marauder siege modules.
Your right, but there are few people (like me) who dont fly solo lvl 5 or class 5/6 Wormholes or Incursions... maybe i am to spoiled from other MMOs but i am really interested to see our Corp flying some PvE Stuff together and have fun.
Sure, you Goons will still screw us, solo or not but i dont have problems with that. 
|

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
84
|
Posted - 2013.08.30 20:52:00 -
[9] - Quote
Jordanna Bauer wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:You just get a weapon timer (requires security to be turned off though). This is a really stupid idea. Why would using it in high sec trigger a weapons timer? Just make it so you can't dock while bastion is active. Turning safety off for PvE is extremely counterintuitive.
They already revoke that. |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
86
|
Posted - 2013.08.30 22:07:00 -
[10] - Quote
I am not really happy to see everyone beging for more and more dps, i dont think thats a good direction, in the end it leads us to a "Need for Speed" like event where Alpha and DPS got nerfed like Nanos got back then... |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
86
|
Posted - 2013.08.30 22:26:00 -
[11] - Quote
Battle Cube wrote:Lephia DeGrande wrote:I am not really happy to see everyone beging for more and more dps, i dont think thats a good direction, in the end it leads us to a "Need for Speed" like event where Alpha and DPS got nerfed like Nanos got back then... well the problem is in eve it usually boils down to dps, you want dps for what you are putting into it... isk.... sp... etc. But this ship requires a lot of investment in both isk and sp, and right now, its bonuses dont offer anything we cant do cheaper or lower sp right now. a great imobile tank isnt very useful, and thats really all this ship is. Its got range, sure, but we already have good ships for that which are cheaper on isk/sp and Those ships arent imobile. You can say the same thing for ships with insane tanks. The new marauder just doesnt give anything we dont already have.... it *might* be useful.... if there was a kind of mission or something you Need absurd tank for, maybe....but those situations usually are in low/null/wh and then you are dead. Anyone with a fast tackle.... warp scrambler.... and your high sp gankbait is gone.
Your right, but i am just worried about the actual situation where the DPS and Manpower just achieve some ridiculous amount, its just a risky combination.
My post was more a reflection about the Community and their wishes. |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
86
|
Posted - 2013.08.30 22:53:00 -
[12] - Quote
For me its a Small/Medium Gang PvE Funboat! |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
88
|
Posted - 2013.08.31 06:27:00 -
[13] - Quote
Why on the love of God does EVERYONE want them to be Solo PvP or Fleet Fight specialized!?
Its a PvE / Small(medium) Gang Supporter! God damn it! |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
89
|
Posted - 2013.08.31 13:12:00 -
[14] - Quote
I am a sadpuppy that 80% of this Thread is just ignorant or "to-stupid-to-read", please no changes CCP we dont want something New we just want just better and more expensive **** like in WoW, bigger is better, T3>T1 at any means give us MOAR!!!!!
|

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
90
|
Posted - 2013.08.31 13:37:00 -
[15] - Quote
My first Charakter where Born 2003 with some Several new starts (accountwise) and one thing was the same until ... 2010 or so then something Strange happens people start complaining about everything, especially New stuff but the old Classic "Adapt or die" get more and more downhill.
I accept that 50 m3 Dronebay is to low, i also accept that they are kinda meh about PvP.
*rant on But seriously get your lazy Ass Up and try to adapt, hell this is only a first preview and >most< comments are only
- More DPS - More Speed - More PvP - More Large Fleet Fight Surviability - More of the same
- Less PvE - Less small Gangs - Less Skills (lazy bastards, learn that Skill and shut up 120 days for a Ship but 20 Days for the main funtion is a no go?!)
- And NOTHING NEW, we dont like Adapt or die, anymore.
*rant OFF
CCP involves the Community and that is the thanks?
|

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
91
|
Posted - 2013.08.31 14:01:00 -
[16] - Quote
I fully agree that this (awesome) Idea need a hell of polishing, but just made it simply Super Soloable with super Web and massive Drones are just no Solution for a MMO driven gameplay, Face it the days of Solo End Content PvE MUST END NOW! |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
91
|
Posted - 2013.08.31 15:00:00 -
[17] - Quote
The Problem is without Logi the 50 Marauders would die faster then the 2-3 Supercaps you where aming, and please stop making the PvE King into a +£ber PvP Vessel. Its still a T2 Ship. |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
91
|
Posted - 2013.08.31 15:06:00 -
[18] - Quote
If you want your quadrillion dps Monster wait for Black Ops changes, leave my Paladin alone! ;-) |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
91
|
Posted - 2013.08.31 17:21:00 -
[19] - Quote
Zaxix wrote:Lephia DeGrande wrote:I am a sadpuppy that 80% of this Thread is just ignorant or "to-stupid-to-read", please no changes CCP we dont want something New we just want just better and more expensive **** like in WoW, bigger is better, T3>T1 at any means give us MOAR!!!!!
Complaining about complaining. How meta
Look, if someone lacks any self-reflection you have to point that loud out. |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
92
|
Posted - 2013.08.31 22:19:00 -
[20] - Quote
Battle Cube wrote:Lephia DeGrande wrote:I am a sadpuppy that 80% of this Thread is just ignorant or "to-stupid-to-read", please no changes CCP we dont want something New we just want just better and more expensive **** like in WoW, bigger is better, T3>T1 at any means give us MOAR!!!!!
its not that we want it to be just better, its that this ship is both expensive and skill intensive, meaning that ships that arent as expensive and skill intensive should not be just plain better than it.
Pirate Ships cost the same and does have nearly the same skill time (if IV-V) and they are clearly good enough to compete, while T1 arent better in any means. Sry cant see your point.
Edit: Ok, Tier 3 is pretty close... |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
92
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 06:55:00 -
[21] - Quote
Since when is my Legion Sleeper Neut safe?! |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
92
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 07:04:00 -
[22] - Quote
To be fair every Ship is dangerous when multiplied by 100 and more. ;) |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
92
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 09:19:00 -
[23] - Quote
No they dont want to make them a PvP Ship just not completly useless like in the current form.
Quote:We also believe that designing them for a very specific activity doesn't fit the emergent nature of EVE, and as such we wish to expand their use to PvP as well. Of course, their high price, low mobility will always ensure their role remains a niche one, but we at least can make that purpose more appealing than a simple "jam me now and forever" target dummy. |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
93
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 09:29:00 -
[24] - Quote
Mc Cormeg wrote:Lephia DeGrande wrote:No they dont want to make them a PvP Ship just not completly useless like in the current form.
I think they had so much more possibilities to achieve this goal than introducing a poor mans siege for marauders where on top of this matter its totaly unclear if this will work out well if it hits the actual eve pvp environment.
Give me ONE.
Their goal isnt only to bring some Balance (which impossible) but also Fun and fresh mechanics.
Now its your Turn. |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
93
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 11:14:00 -
[25] - Quote
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?! |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
93
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 11:24:00 -
[26] - Quote
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. |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
93
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 16:47:00 -
[27] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:Rroff wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote: It has been mentioned many times in this thread that 'legitimate' use of the bastion module will not (cannot) be made.
It was a nice first try at an idea, but I respectfully feel that the idea is flawed.
The idea itself is great - shoehorning it onto marauders is whats ruining it. It was a great idea in Medieval times, just before the mass-production of cannons. The idea of "stand still and build strong walls" has not been valid military doctrine since about 1200AD, and it didn't work that well back then - the defenders starved to death or died of disease. Modern military doctrine favours mobility, versatility and stealth. I cannot envisage this changing in the far future. Fast-moving super-strong things are harder to destroy than stationary super-strong things - always will be.
POS Force Field disaproves.
|

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
99
|
Posted - 2013.09.02 05:47:00 -
[28] - Quote
All i see is add MOAR PVP and MOAR DPS.
I dont See how this is add more favor to the Game, Most People in this Thread just want another Pirate BS and Claim their Idea good.
Does anyone have something fresh to offer too? |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
100
|
Posted - 2013.09.02 10:30:00 -
[29] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:RTSAvalanche wrote:After thinking about this for somtime time..
Leave marauders as they are
But as for these mini-dreads - Rokh, Baddon, Hype & Mael - are all yet to see a T2 varient!
so people who want the mini dreads can have them & those they still love the marauders as they are can still have them too!! T2 hyperion... heh. I can imagine a youtube channel dedicated to the 20:1 gatecamp fights... Hyp is my favourite ship, but I don't think even I would argue for a T2 monster hyperion in the game  But I agree with your sentiment.
That would be a interesting Solution, but then we should ditch Tier3 BS as whole.
2 Tech1 BS 3 Tech2 BS 8 Navy BS 5 Pirate BS |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
100
|
Posted - 2013.09.02 11:39:00 -
[30] - Quote
Skia Aumer wrote:Not going to dig through 74 pages to find if it was mentioned already.
I dont see why should I prefer Marauder over Carrier for nullsec ratting. Carriers have better tank, more DPS, better projection, dont have to deploy and cost only a tad more. So what's the point?
No one force you to switch, but one advantage would be the ability to Jump into Highsec. ;-) |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
100
|
Posted - 2013.09.02 12:40:00 -
[31] - Quote
What Marauders can join Fleets too?! *sarcasm* I really like the Post above me. |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
100
|
Posted - 2013.09.02 13:36:00 -
[32] - Quote
Gort Thud wrote:I fail to see what these new ship designs really have to do with the spirit of the Marauder - they seem to be essentially a new ship class under an old name.
Marauders the very name itself symbolises speed, agility, self sufficient hit and run operations deep behind enemy lines.
I would ask CCP to give us a true Marauder plus develop this mini-Dread concept more fully with the help of the community perhaps even using a different tier battleship hull as the starting point. The Bastion module idea is a decent addition to the Eve technology base but tacking it onto the Marauder class is a mistake in my opinion.
Gort
Marauders are People who get into wardriven villages to burn their houses and steal the treasures befor anyone can react and defend theirselfs "on the fly". In Germany we call it "Brandschatzen" or maybe you know it as pillage.
And yeah the Name really implies fast and hard (cruel) Monsters which the current Form wont conform.
In other Words a new Name would be a nice deal. |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
101
|
Posted - 2013.09.02 18:05:00 -
[33] - Quote
It sure is fine to have OP Stats like the 90% web bonus, but thats the Past and now is now. |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
103
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 17:26:00 -
[34] - Quote
Please read the OP... |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
105
|
Posted - 2013.09.04 09:59:00 -
[35] - Quote
And thats why we need an urgent Drone overhaul... both Drones stats and UI wise. |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
105
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 05:50:00 -
[36] - Quote
Ravasta Helugo wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:Time for another update.We discussed the Marauder situation further and came with the following changes:
- Shield, armor and hull 30% resistance boosts have been removed on the Bastion Module - instead, all Marauders will now get proper tech2 resists. This will allow Marauders to have better RR use outside Bastion and reduce overall tanking effectiveness inside the mode.
- We have removed all tanking bonuses on the Marauders hulls (Armor Repairer amount on the Paladin and Kronos, Shield Boost amount on the Golem and Vargur). Instead, we are giving them 7.5% bonus to the velocity factor of stasis webifiers per level. This will not only help reducing their tanking effectiveness, be more in theme with the ship role itself and help anyone using them with short range weapons. We are not giving them a full 10% per level back as this would be extremely powerful in conjunction with the other bonuses / Bastion. We are going to leave the full 10% web strength amount on the Serpentis ships for now and see how things evolve with time.
- Also, we are removing the mass penalty on the Bastion mode. Tests have shown you can't really turn when it's active anyway, and we don't want to have players abuse that to collapse wormholes.
I will change the OP to match the changes. Woah. Uh, I kinda wanted that non-stacking 30% though. It would have been a huge F U to gankers. Tech II resists... damn. Uh, I'm not sure how I feel about this. In one fell swoop you just make these things way less tanky and ... replaced it with a web bonus... that's weaker than the current web bonus. This is going to make my Paladin slightly worse than it is now, won't it? I just... I need to evaluate these changes in depth and stop rambling. My first reaction is NOT supportive though. Don't cave so easily to the haters.
+1 Really... Thats sad News... |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
105
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 09:36:00 -
[37] - Quote
Besides Balance Problems where the hell did a Web Bonus and Bastion Module fit into their Name?
Marauder = fast and aggressiv Bastion (+ Web) = immobil and persistent
You can tweek around like crazy CCP but you Never will find a Good Solution!
(And yes i love Bastion Modulthingie) |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
107
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 10:46:00 -
[38] - Quote
The Real Problem is Marauder Theme, Bastion Modul, MJD Rolebonus and Web Bonus just wont fit together, its only a Giant expensive Mixed Bag... |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
111
|
Posted - 2013.09.06 05:35:00 -
[39] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:CanI haveyourstuff wrote:HolidayDerp derf wrote:Vindicator wont last as long on cap boosters, Vindicator dual 800 boosted vs Vargur dual 400s in the ASBs tengu could do it 100mn fit could kite/speed tank it untill it ran out of charges which would take forever Super Stuff. Native Freshfood understands PVP.
Yeah but completly ignore small gangs.
If the only thing Eve has to offer is Fleet fights and Solo PvE, then please shut down the Server... |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
114
|
Posted - 2013.09.08 10:59:00 -
[40] - Quote
Another Problem is that the Community is splitted, some prefer balanced ships without to much weird but Fun tweaks others like more crazy and fresh mechanics over boring equality.
CCP cant satisfy both but they could use ships that are mostly unused for some "Tests".
Even the Bastion Marauders suck, they will be used because People like exotic stuff. |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
114
|
Posted - 2013.09.08 12:44:00 -
[41] - Quote
I would love to see that:
T2 -> Needs more Skills but more Fun mechanics Faction -> "Boring" Classic Combat Vessels with little Bit more Fighting Abilities. |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
120
|
Posted - 2013.09.09 10:19:00 -
[42] - Quote
Hell no, keep nerfing bitter vets! xD |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
123
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 10:20:00 -
[43] - Quote
The Bastion Modul is awesome, but no Ship should be forced to use a specific Modul to be usefull... (maybe Stealth Bombers are the only exception...) but anyway, Marauder should use Bastion as possibility not as a must have. |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
123
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 10:39:00 -
[44] - Quote
Debora Tsung wrote:Lephia DeGrande wrote:The Bastion Modul is awesome, but no Ship should be forced to use a specific Modul to be usefull... (maybe Stealth Bombers are the only exception...) but anyway, Marauder should use Bastion as possibility not as a must have. Stealth bombers can fling torps at battleships at 80km range, tell me that's not usefull... Ok, without their cloaks they need support, but so do other ships.
I think your right, but i cant proof it because i lack of experience with SB's.
Anyway, my Point is CCP made a mistake creating Ship Bonus for Moduls, in my opinion Moduls should change if fitted in the right Ship, it could free some Moduls from their Super specific usage, Open more possibilitys in niche Situations.
Sure it would create some horrific rebalancing but it would change Eve in a good Way. |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
124
|
Posted - 2013.09.10 14:14:00 -
[45] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:Lephia DeGrande wrote:Debora Tsung wrote:Lephia DeGrande wrote:The Bastion Modul is awesome, but no Ship should be forced to use a specific Modul to be usefull... (maybe Stealth Bombers are the only exception...) but anyway, Marauder should use Bastion as possibility not as a must have. Stealth bombers can fling torps at battleships at 80km range, tell me that's not usefull... Ok, without their cloaks they need support, but so do other ships. I think your right, but i cant proof it because i lack of experience with SB's. Anyway, my Point is CCP made a mistake creating Ship Bonus for Moduls, in my opinion Moduls should change if fitted in the right Ship, it could free some Moduls from their Super specific usage, Open more possibilitys in niche Situations. Sure it would create some horrific rebalancing but it would change Eve in a good Way. you mean liek Rof bonus for projectiles? Or god.. damage bonus for hybrids? OMG BONUS for modules!! REMOVE THEM REMOVE THEM!!!
|

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
126
|
Posted - 2013.09.11 10:42:00 -
[46] - Quote
Yeah the Rokh and Abaddon are awesome PvP Ships.
PS: And the Gallente Ships do have some Major drawbacks in large Fleets... |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
126
|
Posted - 2013.09.11 10:56:00 -
[47] - Quote
The only Thing i really admit is that CCP buff brawling overall, maybe because it brings more Action into our Spreadsheet, i dunno.
But sure that means it pushes the already Good Blaster and Gallente seems pretty OP but, with some letdowns like bad resistance pattern, odd 50/50 Optimal+Falloff, Them/Kin Damage only, very High Signature, kinda low speed and bonuses to activ tanking i think they do have some pretty "Good" disadventages. |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
132
|
Posted - 2013.09.13 09:53:00 -
[48] - Quote
Debora Tsung wrote:BrutalButFair wrote:Funny how transforming into bastion mode increases the weight 10 times!!!! it's like making weight out of nothing.  Artificial gravity - Science Fiction Rocks! They removed that feature so nobody could abuse it to close wormholes faster. It was initially intended to prevent marauders from being bumped far away when in bastion mode.
This aaaaand they should redo the "physics" already. |

Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
134
|
Posted - 2013.09.16 14:17:00 -
[49] - Quote
Bastion itself would be fir nice into a more supportwise role... I dunno exactly which one but my feelings something like a Bubble with effect which increase something would be nice... |
|
|