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

Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 18:13:00 -
[1] - Quote
The idea seems to be a solution in search of a problem. The main driving reason(s) given by CCP is that you wish to expand the use of the Marauders from PVE focused ships to a dual role into PVP use. The current proposed changes simply do not fulfill that. The main problem I learned about when I was a brand spanking new pilot and sought to learn to one day pvp in a Golem was a two-fold problem that plagues the Marauders as a viable PVP ship. The first and most hindering aspect for PVP use of all Marauders is their extremely weak sensor strength. The second is their relatively weaker dps compared to the cost of the hulls of other ships in their price range(s). This new bastion solves only half the problem while creating an entirely new one of complete immobility. The Golem and all Marauders in general are already very slow thus justifying the tractor range and speed bonus that tractors get on these ships. Making them slower to artificially create a need for the MJD is just something that should not be done. Pilots out to fly the ships as they like without being herded into some fixed fit just cause you like to see pilots using the MJD more. If anything make the MJD a variable distance module and you might get your wish of seeing more of them used effectively. The change while drastic and essentially fixing one aspect of why Marauders are not used for pvp by making them immune to EW under bastion mode does not solve the second reason which is they will die to half competent pilots quite easily. They will be big fish in a barrel that regenerate their bodies, but die once they run out of calories to burn(capacitor). This is not a bad thing entirely, but makes them good at one thing and that is bait ships. I suggest that if you really want to see Marauders used in PVP you simply have to increase sensor strength by an amount that would make them difficult to jam by all but skilled and fitted dedicated EW ships. That is one of the main reasons to never use them to PVP ever. The second problem is dps or more importantly applied dps. The fact that a damage bonus is missing on the new bastion mode is an obvious and glaring issue with Marauders now if the changes stay as they are. Marauders do not so much lack in the tank department as they lack in the applied dps. Marauders as they are now tank well enough on their own for their tanks not being the issue for not being used for PVP their damage is. Increasing the effective applied dps on these ships would see their use in PVP more likely and viable alternative to Faction/Pirate battleships. The drone capacity decrease is also poorly served as the current changes lower the full sets of of drones one can carry to combat smaller and faster ships. The bandwidth change is not as crippling and effectively locks them out from using drones as an effective backup weapon system so I don't entirely disagree, but just makes them less worth for their main role as PVE ships. To end my rant i will just say that the proposed changes while seemingly impressive and pvp enabling are hardly that and will only highlight the obvious deficiencies with the Marauders class as a whole for viable PVP.Current changes make for great and long KM gang kills and bait ships. Yeah they will see more PVP use initially, but once they prove how niche their use will snow dive. |

Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 18:41:00 -
[2] - Quote
Zeus Maximo wrote:Mournful Conciousness wrote:
no mate. Micro WARP drive, so you can burn back to gate. Not micro JUMP drive :-)
Even worse..... The other changes he suggested would diminish webbing effects on the ship. Even then.... How would one stop one of these ships from getting away? I agree this would be a bad change and would drastically change mechanics. My view is like their class name suggest Marauders ought to be Marauding rather than being turned into fixed gun and missile batteries. If anything id like to see this new bastion mode be more like a marauding mode where speed and damage is increased letting them do their thing called marauding.
|

Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 18:53:00 -
[3] - Quote
Razefummel wrote:Would someone PLEASE explain where this change has something comon with balancing ? Just give the Marauder Class Battleships more Sensorstreingh and the PvP-Balancing is absolutly done. just saying.
Greetings
Raze I agree and perhaps some more base speed and/or bonus prop module(s). |

Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 19:02:00 -
[4] - Quote
Kusum Fawn wrote:Came looking for marauders, found seebees, left disappointed. Perhaps CCP should change the name of the class of ships to seebees and then the class would make more sense.
|

Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 19:28:00 -
[5] - Quote
Just Lilly wrote:CCP should add +2 warpstrength to all marauders, they are suppose to be annoying and harassing +5 warpstrength while in bastion mode Just for laughs  Perhaps +1 warp-strength has merit in allowing a pilot to actually make use of a MJD before turning into a wreck and the +5 might as well be +9000 warp-strength in bastion mode for all the good and just for the lulz. If CCP adds this +9000 warp-strength I wont cancel my account as a result of ruining the ship class id like to pvp in. |

Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 20:27:00 -
[6] - Quote
I been wondering if CCP devs explored the possibility of making a marauder mode that instead of making the Marauders into fixed weapons mode it made them extremely fast and agile with damage/tracking bonuses. If its possible id like to know if the devs explored this and what their experiments rendered in terms of ship balance. Sensor strength increase seems like something that should have been looked into and wondering if and what the results were as well in terms of balance or the imbalance it created. |

Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2013.09.01 20:40:00 -
[7] - Quote
kahn liam wrote:Nano Quantum wrote:I been wondering if CCP devs explored the possibility of making a marauder mode that instead of making the Marauders into fixed weapons mode it made them extremely fast and agile with damage/tracking bonuses. If its possible id like to know if the devs explored this and what their experiments rendered in terms of ship balance. The last thing EVE balance needs is another "fast skirmish" situation, since this role is decidedly cramped thanks to a plethora of ships that excel at it. I suppose if they did not explore this possible alternative mode this would be a very valid reason for not doing so since there are ships that fit that more or less. It would be telling however to know how much concept testing they did into changing this class. |

Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2013.09.02 17:28:00 -
[8] - Quote
Mournful Conciousness wrote:George Fox wrote:Asayanami Dei wrote:Change the tractor beam bonus for something more useful, this is the noctis era after all.
I agree. The tractor bonus is useful for solo PVE pilots who have paid for a ship that maximises PVE income, including salvage. It is very useful for these guys, who are the target consumers of this ship. If anything CCP needs to increase the tractor bonuses given that the ship are being given a PVE nerf by the base speed being reduced. A PVE pilot would need to slow boat longer to get in range of wrecks to tractor them in.
|

Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2013.09.02 19:14:00 -
[9] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Alright, ran some more tests on our internal servers with suggested changes. Feedback suggested I ran Buzzkill or Worlds Collide without the web bonus on the Kronos to see how well the ship fared. Challenge accepted. Needless to say it was a slaughter. For the NPCs that is  ............. .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. Hope this wall of text helps a bit (PvE side, as I said, we aren't talking about PvP in this post). Also, here is a preview of the transformation mode on the Kronos. Fair enough as such given that this is a PVE post how much longer did it take for you to tractor and salvage the rooms with the various ships. Given that the ships are being made less mobile via base speed nerf and the Bastion conversion mechanics. Would you say finishing a room with loot and salvage included was faster using the proposed Marauders or slower? |

Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2013.09.02 21:39:00 -
[10] - Quote
Shade Alidiana wrote:Mmm... They are already slow enough, why even slower? But in general sounds good, although I'd like drone bays like 60 m3 instead (5 hobgoblins 5 salvagers 2 armor bots, or 6-5-1 respectively - need some spare drones anyway) I'm not sure about the drone bay nerf myself. I can see where they would have issues with sentries via the bandwidth nerf that solves that issue, but it's not like they are adding a 10% tracking bonus to all drones on these ships for them to be an issue. |
|

Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
7
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 17:41:00 -
[11] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Yes, this can be used in high-sec of course. You just get a weapon timer (requires security to be turned off though). Do not underestimate the use of the bastion module, even for missions. The innate tank allows removal of tanking modules on fittings and the projection bonus helps a lot as well. I remember reaching 55-60km falloff on a Null Neutron Blaster Kronos on our internal test server  Only one bastion module may be fitted, but the resistance given don't stack, just like Damage Control. You can still fit one -with- a damage control though. Q. Will bastion module/mode have a re-activation cool down? |

Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
7
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 18:05:00 -
[12] - Quote
Ewersmen wrote:Marauder for pvp lol
The tank on all marauders is bad ....we don't need a new mode ..just increase the tank ...I fly a golem and I know you have to find the line between tank and dps .
But should I have to find the line ..Its a t2 bs for god sake make the awesome ....not a transformer . I agree the base tank hp nerf makes these ships more vulnerable to alpha before one can local rep or be rr. If anything a small base increase to their respective tank types and a sensor strength increase of +10 across the class would make them more usable for pvp. The base target range should be increases +10 rather than the five in particular to the ranged weapons type ships like the golem to allow effective on time damage to be applied effectively before you have a swarm of drones eating away. |

Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
7
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 18:15:00 -
[13] - Quote
Battle Cube wrote:So for those of us who aren't planning on using bastion mode:
Will non-bastion mode be balanced on its own right against the other ships? Or will non-bastion mode be purposely unbalanced (nerfed) because of the possibility of fitting bastion ? It is nerfed unbalanced for PVP even more so because of the removal/change of bonus to webs on some and drone nerfs across the board not to mention they be even slower. Let us not mention they will be near perma jammed in pvp by light ecm drones in PVP. For PVE use the drones may be an issue for some depending on their fittings and play style and the nerf to their respective main tanks would make them a bit more vulnerable in some cases, but doubtful they be in real danger of being lost less the pilot makes serious mistakes. |

Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
7
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 18:19:00 -
[14] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Ewersmen wrote:Marauder for pvp lol
The tank on all marauders is bad ....we don't need a new mode ..just increase the tank ...I fly a golem and I know you have to find the line between tank and dps .
But should I have to find the line ..Its a t2 bs for god sake make the awesome ....not a transformer . They did buff the tank... The base tank was nerfed making them more likely to be alpha'd, but the tank on marauders was hardly what was holding them back for pvp.T2 resists would have been welcomed in any case and should be considered to offset of the base tank decrease. The base sensor strength of the ships staying the same is also a huge ???they ought to be made on par with T1 base hulls at the very least. |

Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
7
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 18:30:00 -
[15] - Quote
Zeus Maximo wrote:So the marauder can now be deemed worthless to pvp?
minus drone bay minus webs minus sensor strength minus HP minus ability to move with its bonus(What fool fights a fight sitting at zero speed?)
In the future I picture a brand new category being brought to the market labeled PVE SHIPS. Marauders will be the first type in there and their name will have no relation to their actual purpose. To be fair sensor strength was left alone not that is a good thing or maybe it is.....what I mean is the nerfs could have been worse for out of bastion mode just to make them balanced when they are in bastion mode..... |

Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
10
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 19:58:00 -
[16] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium.........
They also keep the resistances they have right now instead of gaining full Tech2 resists, otherwise the combination with the bastion module would be quite over the top.
Would it not be possible to give them them full T2 resists so they don't get Alpha off the field as easily before they go into bastion mode and simply lower the individual resistances the bastion mode would give to the individual resistances to avoid them being over the top? Given that the main tank hp type is being nerfed I don't see why giving them full T2 base resists be an issue if you implemented the bastion mode in the above fashion. Simply adjust the tank resist bonus profiles so they match the current bastion mode resist profile you currently propose. |

Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
11
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 20:07:00 -
[17] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:Zeus Maximo wrote: After this patch I would much rather fly a megathron for pvp!
Then do so, marauders were never PvP ships from the start, it was possible to PvP in them by some interesting fits, but there core was always a PvE ship. While they were never intended or designed as such this marauder rebalance is supposed to address that...and by simply waving people's concerns away by stating they were never meant to PVP adds nothing to resolving the issue now which is PVP balance. |

Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
11
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 20:16:00 -
[18] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:Nano Quantum wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote:Zeus Maximo wrote: After this patch I would much rather fly a megathron for pvp!
Then do so, marauders were never PvP ships from the start, it was possible to PvP in them by some interesting fits, but there core was always a PvE ship. While they were never intended or designed as such this marauder rebalance is supposed to address that...and by simply waving people's concerns away by stating they were never meant to PVP adds nothing to resolving the issue now which is PVP balance. Please link where that said they were going to make marauders PvP ships. Op third paragraph 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. This is not a PVE re-balance of the ships as they are not lacking in that department it is and as most who have noted the concerns are about the changes making sense for a PVP role. If anything all it does is mix things up for PVE and turning them into PVE monsters all the more. |

Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
13
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 20:32:00 -
[19] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Quote:
+More Sensor Strength +Web bonus back(something that will lock down targets, open for ideas) +Larger drone bay and bandwidth +Less tank more dps(last priority)
If CCP wants these to be mini dreads they it would make sense to increase their DPS output. Who cares how "applied" it is. The towers aren't moving.....
I understand people are screaming for more dps but realistically the marauders were fine before this update. All they needed was a sensor strength upgrade!
I'm more than happy to help create ideas for PVP balance. Increasing their tank as much as they did though was a bit much....
Dont need more sensor strength Dont need webs Dont need more drones Its the massive tank and better damage projection that makes the ship interesting. Sensor Strength has always been an issue with Marauders used in a PVP role. It is being addressed by the bastion E-war immunity.The issue with webs can be compensated by fleet composition I agree. As for the drones bays both bandwidth and drone capacity is being nerfed which is a valid concern in both dps and in maintaining the previous PVE style role some may enjoy. I'm sure it not matter much to you if they were simply gotten rid off since you stated you don't use them. The last thing is entirely the strong point and interesting part of the ships now even more so I agree.
|

Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
13
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 20:37:00 -
[20] - Quote
Aglais wrote:baltec1 wrote:
Just because its called a skirmish fleet doesnt mean the fleet spends all of its time zipping about.
This is not a false statement. The problem though, is how the bastion module forces the Marauder into staying in one location for a set period of time. If things go south, they're suddenly at a massive disadvantage and can't do much about it until the module finishes cycling. This IMO is what clashes the most with the whole 'skirmish' idea to me. Pretty much my take on it as well and the stated 60 seconds bastion mode needs to be seriously debated and tested. Id' argue a 45 second cycle time serves the "bastion mode" downside while not turning the ship into an Alpha meat before it enters and when it comes out of the mode.
|
|

Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
13
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 20:50:00 -
[21] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Aglais wrote:baltec1 wrote:
Just because its called a skirmish fleet doesnt mean the fleet spends all of its time zipping about.
This is not a false statement. The problem though, is how the bastion module forces the Marauder into staying in one location for a set period of time. If things go south, they're suddenly at a massive disadvantage and can't do much about it until the module finishes cycling. This IMO is what clashes the most with the whole 'skirmish' idea to me. Its just like any other ship in that reguard. The difference is that it has some tools to get out of these sticky situations that most others dont have. People need to be more creative with these things. I agree with the above and have come around to the idea of the bastion mode, but as most things in EVE and life the devil is in the details. |

Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
13
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 20:58:00 -
[22] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:It was a nice surprise to find out that you can activate your micro jump drive while in bastion mode, if you time it correctly you will micro jump as you are leaving bastion mode.
Or so CCP Ytterbium has implied. Yeah that is what I have understood as well just waiting on confirmation, but since the bastion module does not offline modules other than base speed...well the implications can be interesting. |

Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
16
|
Posted - 2013.09.05 17:46:00 -
[23] - Quote
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. The changes to the resist profiles seem fair and offset the loss of 30% across in bastion mode for a bit more flexibility. The stasis webifier bonus in exchange for the local repair bonus?Beyond the fact that neither bonus is directly related in their role....the only ships that remotely gain from this are the exact ships that currently have them. The Golem and Vargur are getting shorted in this respect. Why not give them racial weapons specific bonuses to damage application rather than stasis web bonuses. How about a sensor strength/scan resolution bonus instead if you are not inclined to put damage based bonuses. That would both make the ships viable PVP platforms if you added that to these changes minus the web bonuses. Also how about an additional 10% tractor range and velocity to offset the base speed nerf for the solo PVE mission people. |

Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
16
|
Posted - 2013.09.07 14:18:00 -
[24] - Quote
Gimme more Cynos wrote:Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:Roime wrote:Trinkets friend wrote: That's fine, to my mind. But dropping the Marauder's rep bonus for T2 resists is not. It favours tanking some rats, and leaves you with shite performance against others (and some missions where, eg, Angels employ EM turrets, etc). This isn't always sufficient to realistically rely on bastion; you just get 2 effective reppers and the same achilles heel resist holes.
That is what this hooplah is about.
Bastion mode and everything is more or less fine in iteration 2. The real problem has been the gutting of the rep bonus for useless webs and applying T2 resists. This benefits nothing.
They had to gut it because it was OP for niche situations and of very limited use outside those situations. Replacing it with T2 expands marauder usability, while still keeping bastion tanking viable. It works much better with logi now. I can see how the web bonus is useless for LR fits, but it's extremely powerful on close range fits. T2 resists and webs benefit PVP applications. Close range fits for a ship with MJD and extended range bonus? And then sacrifice tank for that "short range effectiveness"? I would say Long-Range fits with the option to effectively brawl, and suddenly, it all makes sense, doesn't it? Only for half the marauders it does. Kronos and Paladin have viable close range fits. Golem torp fits are downright crap in comparison to a Kronos short range fit. Golem with cruise is really the best way to go and only way less you are "special".A Kronos short range fit out ranges Golem torp fit. Less they make substantial changes to the missiles launcher weapons systems via xxx buff modification. If you are brawling with a long range fit you are doing it wrong anyway and should lose your ship for using ill advised tactics not for ill advised pvp rebalance of your ship. Torps need to be improved otherwise a web bonus goes to waste on the Golem and the bonus out to be an explosion velocity one instead of webs to have the same desired effect but actually being of some help. |

Nano Quantum
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
16
|
Posted - 2013.09.07 14:30:00 -
[25] - Quote
TravelBuoy wrote:Spc One wrote:Warlord Cybrid wrote:As it stands right now i get almost double the amount of DPS with my skills vs being in a marauder. You're doing exactly the same dps in marauder as in t-1 battleship. Paladin: 4 turrets *100% = 8 turrets + 25% = 10 turrets Abaddon: 8 turrets + 25% = 10 turrets Kronos: 4 turrets *100% = 8 turrets + 25% = 10 turrets Hyperion: 8 turrets + 25% = 10 turrets Caldari navy raven: 8 launchers Golem: 4 * 100% = 8 launchers Vargur: 4 * 100% = 8 + 25%rof = 10.664 Maelstrom: 8 + 25%rof = 10.664 You see you do the same damage as t-1 battleship. My favored maraduer stats is, their ridiculous low sensor strenghts. 11 for Vargur ? :P Megalol Nice PVP stat for dumbs. "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." ROTFL But now the new idiotism of CCP, create bastion modules for them aka. Siege mode: " When in bastion mode, Marauder speed is set to 0 m/s, mass is increased by a factor of 10, cannot warp. Also receives a weapons timer that prevents station docking or gate jumping. Weapon time should not require the user to drop weapon safeties in high-sec" This is the new ISK sinking idea ? Easy targets for SBs and fast billions sinking to refuse bin? Bravo, the CCP can suprise me with their new and new dumb ideas. Yeah I agree regardless of whether bastion mode makes you immune to e-war creating such a heavily unbalanced sensor strength was the main reason they don't see much PVP action in the first place. Unless the ships are given base T1 sensor strengths which would make some sense. Yeah the factions all decided to create a ship that will fight behind enemy lines yet not be able to fire cause they can't lock a damn target. I'm sure someone will come along and make some humorous yet spot on of the marauder back story in the description.
|
|
|
|