|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 30 post(s) |
Topher Basquette Dusch-shur
Montana Freedom Fighters
3
   |
Posted - 2013.09.01 17:46:00 -
[1] - Quote
Gah'Matar wrote:That new skill should be called "Castle Doctrine".
The Description should also refer to some obscure law from some place that used to be called "Texas".
As a person born, raised, and removed from Texas: I approve of this wholeheartedly.
|
Topher Basquette Dusch-shur
Montana Freedom Fighters
3
|
Posted - 2013.09.19 00:57:00 -
[2] - Quote
Well, I read though before making a post about this so, go me. Now let me say that my PVP experience is limited to getting podded early game, RVB and shooting flashies. My PVE experieance is more extensive in involves Frig, AF, Cruisers, HAC, T3, BS(of T1 navy and Pirate types) of all races but Amarr. I enjoy LVL 4s to fund some of my sillier alts and even a bit of wormhole fun.
With that out of the way let me express some confusion. I have been training up for the marauder for a LONG time, but luckily none of the skills I have trained are only for these ships. The first iteration would have made the training more than worth it, the second concerns me a little. I purchased a Golem out of optimism.
So here my perspective.
I would like you to leave the Marauders mostly as they are, but make three changes to the hulls:
- Tractors reach out to kill range.
- T2 resistances on the hulls.
- Sensors strength could be averaged between current and the nearest navy equivalent. That would give the Golem, for example 21. 14 Golem now + 28 CNR /2 = 21, which is still 1 point less than the standard Raven.
If you leave everything else the way that they are then those who have trained into them or that are, like myself, just a couple days away will feel like they have gotten exactly what they have paid for.
Now for the bastion model. That thing sounded cool as expletive deleted at first. What if you adjusted the bonuses to work with the marauders in a more cohesive way (my ideas are bold):
Quote:BASTION MODULE
Increases shield and armor repair amount by 62.5%Awesome
Extends all large turret falloff and optimal by 25% Awesome
Increases all large missile max velocity by 25%Awesome
While active all minimum shield, armor and structure resistances become 30%
Has a cycle time of 60 seconds. Fair Enough
When in bastion mode, Marauder is immune to EW but cannot be remote assisted in any way. fair enough, good trade-off and a last man standing idea.
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 (being investigated) Fair enough
Only one may be fitted per Marauder, cannot be deactivated before cycle endsFair enough
Uses 10 CPU and 100 powergrid to fitFair enough
Uses no specific fuel or capacitor - we were discussing the use of Heavy Water as fuel. However, it doesn't really provide any gameplay (as CCP Rise mentioned, capacitor is the main limiting factor in combat with those ships). Plus it adds more consumables to a class that already commonly uses charges for weapons, cap boosters and need to keep cargo for possible salvaging.Awesome
Skill requirements: High Energy Physics 4 and Energy Grid Upgrades 5
Reasons for these changes
- This will make the 100% increased repair when added to the hull bonus, but not make the ships require remote repair just to operate as they will still have their 37.5% on the hull.
- The resistance portion will help to ease the slightly unfair resistance profiles that we have heard so much about. While it is not as powerful as the first iteration it will help to even out their ability to omni-tank while still keeping racial flavor and not being overpowered with the original 137.5% rep.
The MJD is cool and all, but I would hate to see it forced onto the ships at the cost of any of the rest of this. If it is just added on so that they have some sort of propulsion bonus, sweet.
If anyone thinks this is way out of line please let me know, but I feel like this is the compromise that most of the almost 200 pages here is heading towards. It lets the armor tankers keep their webs, lets ships move and rep, keeps bastion (mostly) in check, smooths out the resistance argument and still keeps most of the other ideas in tact.
Edit: Error and word choice fixing. |
Topher Basquette Dusch-shur
Montana Freedom Fighters
3
|
Posted - 2013.09.30 23:38:00 -
[3] - Quote
There was a lot of fuss and crying about the first iteration, although it is a neat new toy. CCP wanted to get most of us to see how cool it was, but had to find a way to do so. Enter the terrible, terrible things they said they might do.
I like the little joke here. I can't find a link right now but I remember the story from high school about Caesar's marching orders. He needed his troops to march 1.5x (let x be their original speed) so he ordered them to march 2x for awhile. This was so they would love him when he let them slow down to 1.5x, instead of just despising him for ordering them to march 1.5x in the first place. Caesar expansion, Caesar mind game. Alea iacta est.
Nicely done CCP. I mean it.
Edit: Auto-correct was incorrect |
Topher Basquette Dusch-shur
Montana Freedom Fighters
3
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 16:27:00 -
[4] - Quote
Mer88 wrote:what if bastion mode do the complete 180 of what it is doing now?
when bastion mode is on,
-100% repair/boost
-30% resist
-25% weapon range
+100% velocity
+200% agility
There the issue there is that subtracting percentages is way more harmful than adding them. +100% is doubling something. -100% is completely removing it. You might want that to say -50% which is maybe what you had in mind. I also don't like the idea of having negative resists in some areas. If the numbers were more in line I might go out and get one of these blown up while burning around and laughing at people who tried to web me, only once though. |
Topher Basquette Dusch-shur
Montana Freedom Fighters
3
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 16:29:00 -
[5] - Quote
Vorseger wrote:Anyone like the idea of having Marauders be Heavy Assault Battleships? Bastion or not?
Sure, with the new rapid heavy missile launcher full T2 resists, ect. I use a Cerberus for many of the lvl 4s that require a lot of travel, I would love to use my Golem for them instead. |
Topher Basquette Dusch-shur
Montana Freedom Fighters
3
|
Posted - 2013.10.09 20:18:00 -
[6] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:PS.... My shield booster continues to not shut off when I tell it to.
Thank god for the OMFG boosts in bastion or it would be a real problem
I have mine set for Auto-repeat off, since cap is more precious of a commodity, and if I'm a few seconds late on the boost it doesn't seem to make a difference... I did accidentally turn bastion off though and that was a problem. |
Topher Basquette Dusch-shur
Montana Freedom Fighters
3
|
Posted - 2013.10.23 21:05:00 -
[7] - Quote
Dear CCP,
I am fine. How are you? Is work going well? How was your summer? I know we don't talk as much as we should, but I would like to ask you for a favor. Could you please make the Golem's Role Bonus read as follows:
Role Bonus: 100% bonus to large missile launchers, 150% bonus to range and velocity of tractor beams, 70% to MJD whatevers.
It would mean alot to me, as I love heavy missile with all my heart(even post nerf). Also, my mom asked me to say "hello" and "thanks for last night." Whatever that means.
Thank you,
Topher
|
Topher Basquette Dusch-shur
Montana Freedom Fighters
3
|
Posted - 2013.11.03 05:22:00 -
[8] - Quote
So High Energy Physics or not? That's all I want to know. |
|
|
| |
|